Assam’s Identity Struggle

Assam’s Identity Struggle

THE RISE AND FALL OF AGP

ANJAN SARMA

In the verdant plains carved by the mighty Brahmaputra, Assam stands as both a geographical treasure and a geopolitical conundrum.

It is a land where history, identity, and demography intersect with policy, protest, and paradox.

The state’s saga is emblematic of a wider crisis unfolding in India’s “Bamboo Region” — a term often used to describe the culturally rich but politically fraught Northeast — comprising Assam, Nagaland, Manipur, Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura, and Mizoram.

Here, the Indigenous Peoples, with their diverse socio-political systems and ancient traditions, confront existential questions in the face of historical marginalization, demographic upheaval, and digital disruption.

At the center of Assam’s political journey lies the Assam Gana Parishad (AGP), a regional party born from one of the largest student-led movements in post-independence India.

Once a beacon of Assamese assertion and a testament to popular resistance, the AGP’s trajectory today mirrors the broader struggle of the region’s Indigenous communities: a fight to preserve identity amidst eroding autonomy, economic distress, and national political entanglements.

A Land Once Sovereign: Pre-Colonial Autonomy and Internal Colonialism

Before the advent of British imperialism, the region was a mosaic of sovereign polities. Kingdoms like Kamrup and later the Ahom dynasty governed Assam with remarkable stability. The Ahoms, who ruled for over 600 years, represent one of the most successful examples of assimilation and statecraft in South Asian history, having integrated multiple Indigenous communities under a relatively inclusive regime.

Similarly, the Khasis, Nagas, , Mizos etc also governed themselves through tribal chieftainships and customary laws, untouched by the centralized bureaucratic state that defines modern governance. These systems were not primitive relics but organic, deeply rooted frameworks of governance and community cohesion.

The British colonial intrusion in the 19th century marked a brutal rupture in the socio-political fabric of the regions they occupied, fundamentally altering the trajectory of local communities and their governance.

Under the guise of civilizational progress, the imperial policies implemented by the British sought to exploit the rich natural resources of the region for their economic benefit, often at the expense of local populations. This extraction of resources was not merely a byproduct of colonial rule; it was a deliberate strategy aimed at maximizing profit and reinforcing British dominance.

As part of this agenda, traditional institutions that had governed local societies for generations were systematically dismantled. The British imposed new administrative structures that disregarded indigenous governance systems, leading to a loss of authority for local leaders and a fragmentation of community bonds. This disruption was compounded by the introduction of new economic practices and land tenure systems that favored colonial interests, further alienating local populations from their ancestral lands.

Moreover, the British facilitated the migration of various populations to the region, particularly from Bengal, to serve the burgeoning labor demands of colonial enterprises and to meet their agricultural requisition needs.

This influx of migrants was often framed as a means to develop the region, but it had profound implications for the demographic composition of Assam. The newcomers not only altered the economic landscape but also intensified competition for resources, leading to tensions between indigenous communities and migrants.

The seeds of Assam’s demographic anxiety were sown in these years of colonial exploitation and disruption. As the British policies reshaped the region, local populations began to feel a sense of insecurity regarding their identity, culture, and livelihoods. The changes initiated during this period laid the groundwork for future conflicts, as communities grappled with the consequences of colonial rule and the lasting impact of demographic shifts.

The legacy of this colonial intrusion continues to resonate in contemporary discussions about identity, belonging, and rights in Assam, highlighting the long-term effects of historical injustices that still shape the region today.

Post-independence, the Indian state inherited and institutionalized many colonial practices. Without meaningful consultation with Indigenous communities, policies concerning land, migration, development, and representation were formulated from afar. This gave rise to what many scholars and activists term “internal colonialism” — a state of persistent marginalization by a powerful center that exploits peripheral regions for resources while disregarding their cultural and political autonomy.

The Assam Movement and the Birth of the AGP

The explosion came in 1979 with the outbreak of the Assam Movement, led by the All Assam Students’ Union (AASU) and the All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad (AAGSP). It was not merely an anti-immigrant agitation, as is often simplistically portrayed, but a widespread assertion of Assamese identity, culture, and sovereignty. What triggered the movement was the unchecked influx of undocumented migrants, primarily from then-East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), which communities perceived as a direct threat to their existence.

This six-year mass movement saw the mobilization of millions across towns, villages, and campuses. Civil disobedience, economic blockades, and non-violent protests marked the landscape. The culmination was the Assam Accord of 1985 — a tripartite agreement between the Government of India, AASU, and AAGSP. Its core promise was simple yet profound: protect Assam’s demography, identity, and culture.

Clause 6 of the Accord vowed to provide “constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards” to preserve Assamese heritage. The cutoff date for the detection and deportation of illegal immigrants was fixed at March 24, 1971 — a symbolic line in the sand drawn to uphold Assam’s distinct demographic fabric.

From this movement rose the Assam Gana Parishad (AGP), a political party that swept the 1985 Assembly elections. The triumph was more than electoral — it was psychological and historical. For once, the reins of governance were held by sons and daughters of the soil, representatives of a wounded yet hopeful populace.

The Fall from Grace

However, what began with hope soon descended into disillusionment. AGP’s time in power was fraught with internal factionalism, administrative inefficiencies, and a perceived failure to deal with insurgency. The rise of the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA), which pursued a separatist ideology on the basis of the history of Independence before British Imperialism, posed a formidable challenge. AGP’s response was inconsistent, and in its second term, allegations of extra-judicial killings of ULFA sympathizers’ family members further stained its record.

The party split in 1991, and with each election defeat that followed, it drifted further from its original mandate. The promise of resolving the immigration crisis remained unfulfilled. Economic distress — exacerbated by poor infrastructure, corruption, and lack of industrial investment — deepened.

In recent years, the party’s silence on critical economic issues such as inflation, joblessness, and agrarian distress has attracted sharp criticism from various quarters, including opposition parties, civil society organizations, and the general public. Many observers have pointed out that the Asom Gana Parishad (AGP), once a prominent advocate for the rights and welfare of the Assamese people, has become increasingly reticent on these pressing matters. This reticence is particularly glaring given the rising cost of living that has left many families struggling to make ends meet and the persistent unemployment that affects a significant portion of the youth in the state.

Furthermore, the AGP’s alliance with the BJP-led government in Assam has led to accusations that the party is prioritizing political perks and benefits over the genuine pain and suffering of the people it was once committed to serving. Critics argue that the AGP’s leaders have become more focused on maintaining their positions of power and influence within the coalition than on addressing the real concerns of their constituents.

This shift in priorities has not gone unnoticed, as many grassroots supporters feel abandoned and disillusioned by what they perceive as a betrayal of the party’s foundational principles.

The once-fiery voice of Assamese nationalism, which once resonated powerfully through the political landscape, now seems to whisper timidly within the corridors of coalition politics. The vigorous advocacy for Assamese rights and issues that characterized the party’s earlier years has been muted, leading to a growing sense of frustration among those who remember the AGP’s historical commitment to regional identity and social justice.

As the party navigates the complex dynamics of coalition governance, it faces the challenge of rekindling its original spirit and reconnecting with the aspirations of the Assamese people, lest it risk becoming irrelevant in the evolving political landscape of Assam.

Alliance with the BJP and the CAA Storm

The most consequential turn in AGP’s journey came in 2016, when it allied with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and joined the ruling North-East Democratic Alliance (NEDA). The decision shocked many. A party birthed from a secular, inclusive movement that opposed all illegal immigration — regardless of religion — now stood shoulder-to-shoulder with a national party ideologically rooted in majoritarianism.

The alliance was further tested in 2019 with the passage of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). The CAA grants citizenship to non-Muslim migrants from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan who entered India before December 31, 2014. While the law may appear humanitarian to some, in Assam it is viewed as a betrayal of the Assam Accord. It effectively nullifies the 1971 cutoff date by legalizing a new wave of immigrants, threatening to alter the state’s ethnic composition permanently..

Massive protests erupted across Assam, igniting a wave of social unrest that brought together a diverse coalition of voices. Students, artists, and elderly activists flooded the streets, their chants resonating with the fervor of past decades, particularly echoing the powerful slogans of the 1980s—a time when the fight for identity and rights in the region was at its peak. This resurgence of activism was not merely a nostalgic recall of a bygone era; it represented a fervent demand for justice, accountability, and a renewed commitment to the values that once defined the Assamese identity.

However, amidst this backdrop of growing dissent and mobilization, the Asom Gana Parishad (AGP), a party that once prided itself on being the voice of the people, appeared to falter. Many observers noted its troubling complicity with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a relationship that seemed to grow increasingly intertwined yet fraught with the disillusionment of the electorate.

The AGP’s reluctance to sever ties with the BJP raised questions about its integrity and commitment to the very constituents it claimed to represent. Critics argued that the party had become more concerned with maintaining its political alliances than addressing the pressing issues facing the Assamese people.

For countless individuals who had once placed their trust in the AGP as a champion of regional interests, this perceived betrayal marked a significant turning point. The sentiment among many was clear: the AGP, once heralded as the party of the people, had devolved into a mere pawn in the larger game of national politics, sacrificing local issues and the aspirations of its electorate for the sake of political expediency.

This erosion of trust ignited not only protests but also a broader conversation about the future of Assam’s political landscape, as citizens grappled with the implications of their leaders’ choices and the need for a reawakening of genuine representation in governance.

The State’s Hardening Stance and Judicial Endorsements

As of 2025, the Union Ministry of Home Affairs has hardened its stance on immigration. It has directed all states and union territories to identify and verify suspected illegal immigrants, including Rohingya and Bangladeshi nationals, within 30 days.

Meanwhile, the judiciary has largely upheld the executive’s prerogative. In May 2025, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the “right to reside” is exclusive to Indian citizens, refusing to intervene in the deportation of Rohingya Muslims from Delhi. In Assam, the Court expressed displeasure over the prolonged detention of 270 undocumented foreigners, pushing the state for swifter action.

The National Register of Citizens (NRC), intended to resolve the citizenship question once and for all, has instead added layers of confusion. Its final list in 2019 excluded over 1.9 million individuals, many of them Bengali Hindus — the very group CAA seeks to protect. The BJP has since distanced itself from this final list, exposing a political incongruity that complicates implementation.

Culture and Crisis in the Digital Age

In this climate of political flux and demographic tension, the Indigenous communities of Assam and the Northeast face a new challenge — the digital age. Technology, while offering tools for advocacy, preservation, and education, also poses threats of cultural dilution. Indigenous languages and oral traditions, already endangered, risk further erosion amidst the globalized content ecosystems dominated by Hindi and English.

Digital storytelling and social media have empowered Indigenous artists and activists to document traditions and resist homogenization. Yet this access is uneven. Many remote areas of the Northeast still lack basic internet infrastructure. The digital divide is real and growing, sidelining communities from national discourse and economic participation.

The commodification of Indigenous culture, which involves the commercialization and exploitation of cultural elements such as traditional dances, crafts, and other forms of expression, is a significant issue that raises ethical concerns. When these cultural practices are appropriated without the consent of the Indigenous communities they originate from, it not only strips away the cultural significance and context but also leads to a lack of benefit-sharing.

This means that the communities whose cultures are being commodified are often left without any financial or social gains from the widespread use of their traditions.

Furthermore, cultural appropriation can lead to a distortion of identity, as elements of Indigenous culture are often misrepresented or oversimplified when taken out of their original context. This misrepresentation can perpetuate stereotypes and reinforce harmful narratives about Indigenous peoples. The impact of these practices is compounded by the rise of digital platforms, where misinformation can spread rapidly.

The online environment often lacks the nuance and depth required to convey the richness of Indigenous cultures, leading to further misunderstanding and misinterpretation among broader audiences.

Together, these factors present complex challenges that require careful consideration and respect for Indigenous voices and rights. Addressing these issues involves not only recognizing the importance of consent and benefit-sharing but also fostering a deeper understanding of the cultural significance behind Indigenous practices. It is essential to engage in meaningful dialogue with Indigenous communities and support their efforts to reclaim and protect their cultural heritage in a way that honors their traditions and promotes equitable relationships.

Towards an Indigenous Future

The future of Assam and its Indigenous peoples hinges on more than politics. It depends on the ability of communities to reclaim their narratives and shape policy from the grassroots. This involves leveraging digital tools not just for storytelling, but for economic autonomy — through e-commerce of traditional crafts, online education, agro-ecological models, and localized tech innovation.

There is a growing international framework for Indigenous rights, notably the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which recognizes rights to land, language, and self-determination. The Indigenous peoples of the Northeast — with their distinct governance systems, spiritual traditions, and symbiotic relationship with the land — clearly fall under this framework. Yet global solidarity remains limited. Unlike the Indigenous movements in Australia, Canada, or Latin America, the struggles of Northeast India’s communities remain underrepresented.

A Long Road Ahead

More than four decades have passed since the Assam Movement, a significant socio-political movement that reverberated across the nation, yet its legacy continues to be a topic of intense debate and contention. This movement, which sought to address various issues related to identity, immigration, and the rights of the indigenous population, has left behind a complex and multifaceted legacy that still influences contemporary politics and social dynamics in Assam.

At the heart of this legacy lies Clause 6 of the Assam Accord, a crucial provision intended to safeguard the unique cultural and linguistic identity of the Assamese people. Despite its importance, Clause 6 has yet to be implemented, raising questions about the commitment of various political entities to uphold the promises made during the Accord. This lack of action has led to frustration and disillusionment among many Assamese citizens, who feel that their identities and rights continue to be marginalized in the face of political expediency.

Furthermore, the political landscape in Assam has been significantly shaped by the Asom Gana Parishad (AGP), a party that was born out of the Assam Movement and was once a champion of its ideals. However, the AGP’s ideological surrender to coalition politics has cast a long shadow over its founding principles.This shift has not only affected the party’s credibility but has also contributed to a broader sense of betrayal among its supporters, who expected it to remain steadfast in its commitment to the Assamese identity and rights.

As the political landscape continues to evolve, the unresolved issues stemming from the Assam Movement and the unfulfilled promises of the Assam Accord remain critical points of contention. The legacy of this movement serves as a reminder of the enduring struggle for identity and rights in Assam, highlighting the need for renewed focus on the aspirations of the Assamese people and the implementation of protective measures such as Clause 6. As the region grapples with these challenges, the complexities of its past will undoubtedly shape its future trajectory.

Yet the soul of Assam refuses to be subdued. From the hills of Karbi Anglong to the Dibrugarh, from digital collectives to protest songs, the people continue to assert their right to exist — not as relics of the past, but as architects of the future.

In a nation grappling with migration, identity, and federalism, Assam’s story is a crucial chapter. It asks whether India can honor its pluralism without sacrificing its peripheries. Whether a regional identity forged over centuries can survive the pressures of national ambition. Whether, in this age of information and polarization, memory can still be a form of resistance.

Assam endures. But the question remains — at what cost?

Mahabahu.com is an Online Magazine with collection of premium Assamese and English articles and posts with cultural base and modern thinking.  You can send your articles to editor@mahabahu.com / editor@mahabahoo.com (For Assamese article, Unicode font is necessary) Images from different sources.