Assam

Assam is distinguished by its rich cultural heritage and historical importance. Located in northeastern India, it is renowned globally for its extensive tea plantations, the formidable Brahmaputra River, and its picturesque, verdant landscapes.

Assam’s historical narrative is one of resilience and identity, from the ascendance of the ancient Ahom Kingdom, celebrated for its defense against successive invasions, to prominent figures like Lachit Borphukan and social reformers of enduring influence . Its confluence of varied ethnicities and cultural traditions creates a unique and cohesive social fabric. The state’s heritage is best known for its world-renowned tea and artisanal craftsmanship (Khan, 2024).

The Ahom dynasty, which ruled Assam for nearly six centuries, resisted repeated Mughal incursions and forged a distinct administrative and cultural legacy. The Battle of Saraighat in 1671, where Lachit Borphukan led the Ahom forces to victory over the Mughals, remains a celebrated moment in Assamese history, emblematic of the people’s fierce independence and strategic acumen (Singha, 2022). This era laid the foundation for a strong sense of regional identity that continued to shape Assamese politics in the colonial and postcolonial periods.

The British annexation of Assam marked the end of the Ahom dynasty's nearly 600-year rule, weakened by the Burmese invasion (1817–1826). The Treaty of Yandabo in 1826, after the Anglo-Burmese wars, formalised British control over Assam (Khan, 2024). British consolidation included the gradual annexation of territories: Kachari in 1832, Khasi, Garo, and Jaintia Hills by 1835, and Matak, Sadiya, and North Cachar by 1854. The Bengal Presidency governed Assam from 1826 to 1873 and became a major tea plantation centre during this period (Khan, 2024).

Tea plantations were established on a massive scale, and Assam's economy became closely tied to British interests. However, this development came at a cost. Labourers, often referred to as "coolies," were brought from central India under exploitative conditions to work in tea gardens. These communities remain a vital part of Assam’s social composition today, although they have historically faced economic marginalisation and limited political representation (Varma, 2016).

Colonial Assam consisted of outer hilly areas, which the British labelled 'excluded' or 'partially excluded,' that were governed by the stringent Inner Line Regulation mandating permits for outsiders (Libang & Tiwari, 2024). Assam then was not only home to the Assamese but also to 'coolie' labor from Central India who were brought in as workforce for tea plantations, and supervised by Bengali Administrators.

Coolie labour in Assam

This demographic layering intensified Assam's ethnic complexity. The presence of diverse indigenous groups—Bodos, Karbis, Mishings, and others—in the plains, along with hill communities and migrant labour, resulted in a state marked by intricate inter-community relations (Pathak, 2021). This plurality was both enriching and fraught with tensions, especially over land, identity, and political autonomy.

In 1874, Assam separated from Bengal and became a Chief Commissioner’s Province, with Shillong as its capital. In 1905, the Assam Province was separated from Bengal and renamed as the North-East Frontier. It was then incorporated into the new provinces of Eastern Bengal and Assam. However, the Bengal partition was soon annulled 7 years later, and Assam came to be re-established as Assam Province (Khan, 2024).

The early 20th century witnessed a rise in Assamese literary and cultural nationalism. Thinkers like Lakshminath Bezbaroa, and later Bishnu Prasad Rabha and Jyoti Prasad Agarwala, emphasised Assamese linguistic and cultural identity through literature, music, and drama (Deka, n.d). This cultural resurgence laid the groundwork for later political assertions based on identity.

Gopinath Bordoloi

At the time of integration, the Bordoloi Committee (named after Gopinath Bordoloi) was constituted to determine the fate of Assam. It proposed autonomous district-wise councils across the state and paved the way for the inclusion of the Sixth Schedule in the Constitution. The districts thus marked were Garo Hills, United Khasi–Jaintia Hills, North Cachar Hills, Mikir Hills, and Lushai Hills (later Mizo District). It was decided that the council would have legislative powers over land usage, forest management, town councils, and property inheritance. Without the assent of the district councils, no act could be applied to the autonomous districts (Borah & Bhuyan, 2023).

At the time of Independence, the North-This special provision was an attempt to accommodate the aspirations of hill tribes while maintaining Assam's territorial integrity. The Sixth Schedule played a key role in diffusing separatist tendencies at that time by offering limited self-rule within the framework of the Indian Constitution (Borah & Bhuyan, 2023).

At the time of Independence, the North-East Frontier Tract (NEFT) comprised northeastern regions bordering Bhutan, Myanmar, and Tibet. When India adopted its constitution, the NEFT was made a separate politico-administrative entity, but was constitutionally a part of Assam. In 1954, the frontier tract was renamed to the North East Frontier Agency (NEFA) (Luthra, 1971).

NEFA remained under central control but was administered by Assam. The region’s strategic location made it crucial for India’s defence and foreign policy, particularly in light of the evolving tensions with China. As infrastructure and governance expanded under Indian rule, local ethnic groups also began demanding more political recognition.

Later, when the States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) was constituted in 1953, the Naga National Council (NNC) demanded separation from India, while the hilly autonomous districts demanded a separate state (Goswami, 2007). The SRC considered neither demand, resulting in a demand for Naga independence in the shape of a single administrative unit comprising the Naga Hills (in Assam) and the Tuensang Frontier Division (NEFA). Nehru agreed to the demand, and the Naga Hills-Tuensang Area came into being as an administrative unit within Assam in 1957 (Khongreiwot, 2009).

This was a significant moment in Assam’s territorial evolution. Though designed as a compromise, it was a stepping stone for the eventual secession of Naga territories from Assam’s fold. It also set a precedent for future demands from other hill regions.

In September 1962, the Union government passed the State of Nagaland Act, and the state of Nagaland, comprising the entire territory of the Naga Hills–Tuensang Area, came into being. It was the first of present eight north-east states to be carved out of Assam. The 1960s were a period of much unrest in Assam. Mizo National Famine Front (MNF) emerged in response to the Mautam Famine in Mizo Hills (Das Gupta, 2017). Around the same time, conflicts surrounding the imposition of Assamese as the state's official language came up. What made matters worse was that India and China went to war in 1962 over NEFA. Thereafter, in 1966, the MNF and its associated Mizo National Army (MNA) launched Operation Jericho. As a part of the operation, the MNF attacked army posts and government buildings, took over communications and control of the district, and declared Mizoram independent (Chadha, 2009).

The linguistic agitation in 1960 and again in 1972 over making Assamese the medium of instruction in universities alienated several tribal and Bengali-speaking populations, especially in the Barak Valley and hill areas. This caused disillusionment and reinforced calls for political separation among groups who feared cultural assimilation or political domination by Assamese speakers (Barman, 2019).

After winning the 1967 elections, the All-Party Hill Leaders’ Conference (APHLC) demanded a separate state (Bhattacharya, 1967). In 1969, Parliament passed the Assam Reorganisation (Meghalaya) Act, in which the autonomous state of Meghalaya, including the districts of Garo Hills and United Khasi–Jaintia Hills, was created within Assam (GoI, 1969). Three years later, in 1972, the Parliament passed the North-Eastern Areas (Reorganisation) Act, which made Meghalaya and the Mizo Hills District (Mizoram) separate states (Piang, 2013). The NEFA was also converted into a UT, the present state of Arunachal Pradesh. Assam has not been reorganised since.

Post-1972, Assam retained its core territory, but ethnic tensions did not disappear. The influx of migrants from Bangladesh, especially after the 1971 war, sparked widespread resentment. This led to the Assam Movement (1979–1985), spearheaded by the All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), which demanded detection and deportation of illegal immigrants The movement culminated in the Assam Accord of 1985, which sought to balance security concerns with citizenship rights, though its implementation has remained contentious (Baruah, 2019).

Since then, Assam has undergone significant socio-political transformations. The Bodoland movement led to the creation of the Bodoland Territorial Region, and numerous tribal groups continue to press for recognition and autonomy (Das, 1994). Yet, despite these challenges, Assam remains a critical gateway to India's Northeast, a region of great strategic importance.

References

• Barman, B. (2019). Language And Politics In Assam: After Independence. 

  
  

• Baruah, J. (2019.) The Role of Students in the Historic Assam Movement. Research Review Journals. 

  
  

• Bhattacharyya, B. K. (1967). A Separate Assam Hills State: What Does It Mean?. Economic and Political Weekly, 491-494.  

  
  

• Borah, P. P., & Bhuyan, A. J. (2023). Local Self-governance in Sixth Scheduled Areas of Assam: Constitutional and Political Challenges. Indian Journal of Public Administration, 69(3), 692-697. 

  
  

• Chadha, V. (2009). India’s counterinsurgency campaign in Mizoram, In India and Counterinsurgency (pp. 44-60). Routledge. 

  
  

• Das, J. K. (1994). The Bodoland Movement in local and national perspectives. The Indian Journal of Political Science, 55(4), 417-426.  

  
  

• Das Gupta, M. (2017). Hunger, Governance Failure and Its Outcome: An Analysis of the Historical Experience of the Mizo Hills District of Undivided Assam. In Inequality, Poverty and Development in India: Focus on the North Eastern Region, 351-362. 

  
  

• Deka, J. P. (n.d.) Politics of Identity: A Study on the Political Identity of the Rabhas of Assam. 

  
  

• Goswami, N. (2007). The Naga narrative of conflict: Envisioning a resolution roadmap. Strategic Analysis, 31(2), pp. 287-313. https://doi.org/10.1080/09700160701391241 

  
  

• Government of India (1969). The Assam Reorganisation (Meghalaya) Act, 1969. 

  
  

• Khan, M. (2024). Assam. In The Territories and States of India 2024 (pp. 86-96). Routledge. 

  
  

• Libang, M., & Tiwari, A. K. (2024). Inner Line Regulation Of 1873 And Its Implications In The Adi Belt Of Arunachal Pradesh. Humanities and Social Science Studies, Vol. 13, Issue 2, No.21. 

  
  

• Luthra, P. N. (1971). North-East frontier agency tribes: Impact of Ahom and British policy. Economic and Political Weekly, 1143-1149.  

  
  

• Pathak, S. (2021). Census as a Site of Contestation: Identity Politics among the Plains Tribes in Colonial Assam. Explorations, ISS e-journal, Vol. 5 (2), pp. 105-124. 

  
  

• Piang, L. L. K. (2013). Ethnic mobilisation for decolonisation: colonial legacy (the case of the Zo people in Northeast India). Asian Ethnicity, 14(3), 342-363. 

  
  

• Singha, S. (2022). The Ahom Mughal Conflicts with Special Reference to the Battle of Saraighat. London Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences , 22(20), 61–66.  

  
  

• Varma, N. (2016). Coolies of capitalism: Assam tea and the making of coolie labour (p. 242). De Gruyter.