Had school and college education at Coochbehar, West Bengal. Went to the University of North Bengal, Siliguri, for Post graduation and Ph D. worked at St Anthony's College, Shillong; OKD Institute of Social Change and Development, Guwahati; North Eastern Hill University, Shillong. Had worked on society, polity and economy of India's Northeast in general and border trade, cross-border cooperation, security and development, conflict and conflict mitigation in particular. Supervisors: Supervisor
Having surrounded by four neighbouring countries viz. Bangladesh, Bhutan, China and Myanmar and ... more Having surrounded by four neighbouring countries viz. Bangladesh, Bhutan, China and Myanmar and shared 98 per cent border with them, India’s Northeast is often viewed as a borderland by the national mainstream. The state-centric security perspective of the national mainstream considers this region to be extremely sensitive and vulnerable and hence lays more emphasis in protecting the borders than promoting the welfare of the people residing in the borderlands. As the coincidence of ethnic and spatial boundaries have led to the convergence of social, cultural and territorial peripherality, communities residing in these borderlands often felt left out, discriminated, subjugated and deprived. Deprivation induced manifestations are often coached in retaliatory and secessionist overtones providing scopes for militarizing the border lands under the pretext of national security all through the state-led era (1947-1990). Insurgency and counter-insurgency operations in and across the borders had created perpetual threat to life and security of the bordering communities. Instead of inculcating the idea of “shared border”, nation states in South Asia have made them “shared anxieties”.
As far as India’s eastern frontier is concerned, situation began to change following the collapse of bipolarity and launch of globalization which enabled nation states to reconfigure their strategic alliances in order to leverage external relations for internal stability and development. Although secessionist forces in Northeast have largely been neutralized, the process of time-space compression working in capitalist development was considerably resisted by the people living in the margins by way of creating alternative narratives and refusing to assimilate culturally with the mainstream. As the cross-border affinities did not lead to any significant economic interdependence due to stringent control over movement of local people across the border, even after the return of tranquility, the borders are yet to be transformed into the centers of cross-border synergies. As unlike China, border states hardly play any independent role in forging cross-border economic initiatives, India’s strategy to use sub-regional cooperation as a tool for the development of the bordering regions—be it Look East Policy, BBIN, SASEC, BIMSTEC, SAARC—has failed so far. Once “state centric mindset” is shaked off and bordering states are empowered to forge cross border deals in trade and business, the geo-politics will give way to geo-economics to fill the air of the borders with the dim of business activities instead of taping sounds of the security forces.
Having surrounded by four neighbouring countries viz. Bangladesh, Bhutan, China and Myanmar and ... more Having surrounded by four neighbouring countries viz. Bangladesh, Bhutan, China and Myanmar and shared 98 per cent border with them, India’s Northeast is often viewed as a borderland by the national mainstream. The state-centric security perspective of the national mainstream considers this region to be extremely sensitive and vulnerable and hence lays more emphasis in protecting the borders than promoting the welfare of the people residing in the borderlands. As the coincidence of ethnic and spatial boundaries have led to the convergence of social, cultural and territorial peripherality, communities residing in these borderlands often felt left out, discriminated, subjugated and deprived. Deprivation induced manifestations are often coached in retaliatory and secessionist overtones providing scopes for militarizing the border lands under the pretext of national security all through the state-led era (1947-1990). Insurgency and counter-insurgency operations in and across the borders had created perpetual threat to life and security of the bordering communities. Instead of inculcating the idea of “shared border”, nation states in South Asia have made them “shared anxieties”.
As far as India’s eastern frontier is concerned, situation began to change following the collapse of bipolarity and launch of globalization which enabled nation states to reconfigure their strategic alliances in order to leverage external relations for internal stability and development. Although secessionist forces in Northeast have largely been neutralized, the process of time-space compression working in capitalist development was considerably resisted by the people living in the margins by way of creating alternative narratives and refusing to assimilate culturally with the mainstream. As the cross-border affinities did not lead to any significant economic interdependence due to stringent control over movement of local people across the border, even after the return of tranquility, the borders are yet to be transformed into the centers of cross-border synergies. As unlike China, border states hardly play any independent role in forging cross-border economic initiatives, India’s strategy to use sub-regional cooperation as a tool for the development of the bordering regions—be it Look East Policy, BBIN, SASEC, BIMSTEC, SAARC—has failed so far. Once “state centric mindset” is shaked off and bordering states are empowered to forge cross border deals in trade and business, the geo-politics will give way to geo-economics to fill the air of the borders with the dim of business activities instead of taping sounds of the security forces.
Uploads
Papers by gurudas das
As the coincidence of ethnic and spatial boundaries have led to the convergence of social, cultural and territorial peripherality, communities residing in these borderlands often felt left out, discriminated, subjugated and deprived. Deprivation induced manifestations are often coached in retaliatory and secessionist overtones providing scopes for militarizing the border lands under the pretext of national security all through the state-led era (1947-1990). Insurgency and counter-insurgency operations in and across the borders had created perpetual threat to life and security of the bordering communities. Instead of inculcating the idea of “shared border”, nation states in South Asia have made them “shared anxieties”.
As far as India’s eastern frontier is concerned, situation began to change following the collapse of bipolarity and launch of globalization which enabled nation states to reconfigure their strategic alliances in order to leverage external relations for internal stability and development.
Although secessionist forces in Northeast have largely been neutralized, the process of time-space compression working in capitalist development was considerably resisted by the people living in the margins by way of creating alternative narratives and refusing to assimilate culturally with the mainstream. As the cross-border affinities did not lead to any significant economic interdependence due to stringent control over movement of local people across the border, even after the return of tranquility, the borders are yet to be transformed into the centers of cross-border synergies. As unlike China, border states hardly play any independent role in forging cross-border economic initiatives, India’s strategy to use sub-regional cooperation as a tool for the development of the bordering regions—be it Look East Policy, BBIN, SASEC, BIMSTEC, SAARC—has failed so far. Once “state centric mindset” is shaked off and bordering states are empowered to forge cross border deals in trade and business, the geo-politics will give way to geo-economics to fill the air of the borders with the dim of business activities instead of taping sounds of the security forces.
As the coincidence of ethnic and spatial boundaries have led to the convergence of social, cultural and territorial peripherality, communities residing in these borderlands often felt left out, discriminated, subjugated and deprived. Deprivation induced manifestations are often coached in retaliatory and secessionist overtones providing scopes for militarizing the border lands under the pretext of national security all through the state-led era (1947-1990). Insurgency and counter-insurgency operations in and across the borders had created perpetual threat to life and security of the bordering communities. Instead of inculcating the idea of “shared border”, nation states in South Asia have made them “shared anxieties”.
As far as India’s eastern frontier is concerned, situation began to change following the collapse of bipolarity and launch of globalization which enabled nation states to reconfigure their strategic alliances in order to leverage external relations for internal stability and development.
Although secessionist forces in Northeast have largely been neutralized, the process of time-space compression working in capitalist development was considerably resisted by the people living in the margins by way of creating alternative narratives and refusing to assimilate culturally with the mainstream. As the cross-border affinities did not lead to any significant economic interdependence due to stringent control over movement of local people across the border, even after the return of tranquility, the borders are yet to be transformed into the centers of cross-border synergies. As unlike China, border states hardly play any independent role in forging cross-border economic initiatives, India’s strategy to use sub-regional cooperation as a tool for the development of the bordering regions—be it Look East Policy, BBIN, SASEC, BIMSTEC, SAARC—has failed so far. Once “state centric mindset” is shaked off and bordering states are empowered to forge cross border deals in trade and business, the geo-politics will give way to geo-economics to fill the air of the borders with the dim of business activities instead of taping sounds of the security forces.