In Assam, this is not an academic problem, it is a very serious political reality. What is at stake there is the entire north-east India. Therefore, I think any patriotic person must take care to safeguard the integrity and unity of this country. That is the first priority today. There is no doubt about that. Negotiations will have to be started for that. When Prime Minister, Mrs. Gandhi took over, she started well. She called the people; she called some of us, asked the party leaders, and discussed the matter with us. I think while some of us said that we may take 1971 as the cut-off-year, some others said that we may take 1961 as the cut-off-year. A majority of them said that we may take 1971 as cut-off-year. But later on, it was found out during the course of negotiations that the theory of taking any year as cut-off-year was not workable, because it would not create conditions to start negotiations.
It was only for that reasons that it was said that this was not workable. Therefore, nobody is emphasizing now on that, at least, on the government side. As much as I could understand the Governments policy, I would say that they are not interested in any particular year as the cut-off-year. We will have to start negotiations. But, when you start negotiations, you will have to do that on certain principles. On what basis can we start that? First of all, we must make an appeal to them to come there, sit with us and with leaders of country. It is not a question between government and Assam leaders in that movement. It is a question between India and one of its parts. It is an internal matter, wherein certainly be negotiations, we can find a solution.
Therefore, it was suggested that negotiations must be started. I must make one position clear. I endorse what Mr. Indrajit Gupta said yesterday. When the Ordinance was promulgated declaring that area as a disturbed one, I myself was very much distressed to hear that news. I wrote to Prime Minister saying that I am one of those who are interested in national solution. I am not for this type of dealing with the problem. This sort of repressive law is only counterproductive where feelings of million of people are involved and where masses are involved. I do not want to deny, or support, that there is not a foreign hand. So far as the Government is concerned, there is nothing new about that. I am quite sure from my general experience that whenever such a trouble tarts in India, foreign hands are always there. It has to be presumed. There is no necessity of having any specific evidence on that.
My main point is that this sort of repressive measure is not the way to deal with the problem. Of course, there is one exception to that and that I must make clear here. When it is a question of protection of minorities, whether it be linguistic or religious minorities, certainly, Government will have to firm about that. There may be Bengali Muslim or Bengali Hindus or there may be Biharis. They may be very much disturbed that they may get killed. Some figures were mentioned yesterday. I do not want to go into those figures. Even if one person is killed in an organized manner, it is the responsibility of the Central Government to use all possible force, to suppress it. There is no other way; there is no other solution for this particular matter.
