[dropcap]W[/dropcap]hat does it mean when the Centre said it can act only as a facilitator in resolving the Assam-Nagaland border issue? Is it that the Central government has no authority to do anything even if blood -shed occurs due to border impasse? Can it also mean that the stake holding states can alter the border lines without consulting the Centre? In other words, the states have full authority in sizing their territories if the stake holders have mutual understanding. This is in one way a democratic and federalist approach.
However, in a border row filled-region such as in the Northeast leaving the stake holding parties the responsibility to resolve the problems will prove catastrophic. The ethnicity-ridden region like ours, the problem is beyond the border lines or the area of the territory. Ethnic politics and issue of dominance over the other have also been the factor. In such situation a higher authority (the Centre) which has the neutral stand should exercise its power to help resolve the border issues. Here, we don’t mean that the Centre should impose its dictum and have its way without reflecting the sentiment and pulse of the people. The Centre should take a pro-active role and invest its creativity and wisdom to settle the border problem. The border tussle has been there because both Assam and Nagaland cannot find a common ground. In such situation the Centre asking both the parties to solve the impasse amicably is absurd.Union minister of state for home Kiren Rijiju told the Parliament on Wednesday that the Centre’s role was only to work as a ‘facilitator.’ The union minister also is aware of the gravity of the problem. Scores of lives have been claimed due to this issue in recent times. Night curfew is going on at the moment as a pre-emptive measure. Given this background the comment of the Union minister was really disappointing.
The border issue has the potential to create serious law and order problem and the Centre should not sleep over it.
