Inter-state border pact

The Assam-Meghalaya agreement to end their five-decade-old border dispute in six of the 12 contested locations is a bold step forward for peaceful resolution of issues susceptible to local tensions. It comes within eight months of the deadly and unprecedented clash in July last year between the police personnel of Assam and another neighbour Mizoram, that left six Assam cops dead. The Centre’s proactive intervention to avoid any such situation in future, aided by the compatible political affiliation of those holding the reins, may have been a big factor in clinching the deal, but the Chief Ministers, Himanta Biswa Sarma and Conrad Sangma, deserve credit for exhibiting strong political will to initiate and execute the process of burying the past and working towards mutually-acceptable adjustments.

The North-East states of Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Meghalaya were carved out of Assam, leaving a residue of boundary problems dominated by claims and counter-claims. Both the leaders are bound to attract criticism from the Opposition parties for not taking them into confidence or on charges of compromising with the interests of their respective states, but a decisive way forward for resolving inter-state border disputes has been charted in the North-East and elsewhere in the country. The bottomline is to tone down the rhetoric, ensure zero tolerance to violence and empower joint resolution committees with mandates to look for common ground.

The Centre’s contention that this pact amplifies cooperative federalism and provides a roadmap for resolution of other boundary disputes carries a lot of weight, but each inter-state dispute has its own unique contours and sensitivities that need to be taken into account. The importance of the Assam-Meghalaya agreement lies in what it represents: the willingness to find solutions to complex legacy problems and not allow them to linger on. It ought to trigger similar sincere attempts all across the country.