Enquiry commission submits report on the secret killings during the henious Prafulla regime
Guwahati, Aug 12:The enquiry report of three out of the six cases relating to the infamous Secret Killings which rocked the state in 1998 and the ghost of which is still stalking the former Chief Minister of Assam Prafulla Kr Mahanta were submitted to state government on Friday.
Retired Justice J.N Sarma was entrusted with the job of probing the dark episode after Retired Justice Mira Sarma quit the enquiry commission on Nov 2002. The term secret killing became famous after a spate of killings of ULFA relatives including the family of Mithinga Daimary towards the end of Prafulla Kr Mahanta led AGP government in 1998.
Justice Sarma today submitted reports of three cases- Jyotish Sarma of Guwahati, Dr Dharani Dhar Das of Boroma in Nalbari and Rajesh Mishra and Rajeev Koch of Tezpur.
The report of Jyotish Sarma, an employee of Gauhati University who was killed in January 2001 states that fratricidal clash among rival ULFA groups was responsible for the killing.
Regarding the killings of Dr Dharanidhar Das, brother of ULFA’s former publicity secretary Mithinga Daimary and his four family members, Justice Sarma rued that in spite of the killings occurring at around 11 at night with volley of shots fired resembling a diwali night nobody came forward to provide any evidence and an FIR was lodged only next day at 11 am though the police station was situated only 1 km away from the spot.
“ Though I expected support from the government but I prepared the report of the three cases after lots of problem,” informed Sarma.
Regarding the case of Rajesh Mishra and Rajiv Koch of Tezpur reports of kidnapping and land grabbing is submitted. Two surrendered ULFA militants Viveknath and Krishna Hazarika were found involved. It may be mentioned that one of the accused Krishna is already dead whereas Vivek Nath is languishing in jail. Importantly, Justice Sarma while speaking to media revealed that no politician, bureaucrat or police officials were found involved in the three cases as none gave evidences in this regard.
Saturday, August 13, 2005
Monday, August 08, 2005
A GREAT CALLER TO ISLAM, SHEIKH AHMED DEEDAT PASSES AWAY
DURBAN, South Africa, August 8, 2005 - Hundreds of people are expected to attend the funeral of South African caller to Islam Sheikh Ahmed Deedat, who passed away in the early hours Monday, August 8.Sheikh Deedat, 87, passed away at his home in Trevennen Road, Verulam in the province of KwaZulu Natal at 7 a.m.The cause of his death was heart failure.
The family was not in a state of shock, said Yusuf, Late Sheikh Ahmed Deedat's son. “As Muslims we believe that every soul shall taste death.”
He added that the last moments of his father’s life were peaceful, and coincided with the commencement of a recitation of "Surah Yaseen" on an Islamic radio station.
“Channel Islam had just introduced and begun to play Surah Yaseen when the throes of death began,” he explained. “My father just looked at us and then passed away.”
Sheikh Deedat will be buried in the Verulam cemetery after Salaatul-Maghrib (Maghreb prayers) Monday.
Hundreds of people from around the country are expected to participate in his funeral prayer, and his family says that people from across the world, such as India, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have been calling to convey their condolences.
“His death comes as a shock to us,” Maulana Ahmed Kathrada, of the Jamiatul ‘Ulama (Scholars' Group), a local theological body.
He added that Sheikh Deedat had served not only South Africans, but the Muslim Ummah at large, for many years.“We pray that Allah Grants him a lofty position in Jannah (Paradise), and that He Grants his family patience, especially his wife who has endured so much during the last few years.”
Sheikh Ahmed Deedat was bed-ridden for almost a decade. Mrs Hawa Deedat, who had spent the last nine years nursing her husband and administering his daily injections, was present at her husband’s side at the time of his death, and she is well, said Yusuf.“She is the wife of a soldier, and can therefore only be a soldier herself."
Several other religious leaders and political figures expressed their sadness at the news of Sheikh Deedat’s death.
Mr Riaz Jamal, a director of the Al-Ansaar Foundation in Durban, South Africa, who had done a thesis on Sheikh Deedat as part of his Masters in Islamic Studies, said that there was a need for the Muslim and Christian worlds to continue to bring audiences together for religious debate and dialogue.
“Sheikh Ahmed Deedat was a global caller to Islam,” he said."I don’t think any other Muslim wrote to the Pope, inviting him to Islam, but Sheikh Deedat did. It’s our responsibility to continue in propagating his message.”Sheikh Deedat’s health had been steadily deteriorating in the last few months after he had suffered various complications related to the lock in syndrome stroke which had left him paralysed and bed-ridden for almost a decade.His death marks the end of an era of Da’wah in which his name became synonymous with breaking down inter-faith barriers.
Born on July 1, 1918, Sheikh Deedat arrived in South Africa, from India, as a nine-year-old in August 1927.Although he hadn’t previously been exposed to the English language, he learnt it in six months, excelled at school and finished top of his class.
However, due to financial considerations, his father removed him from school during his early years of secondary schooling. He was sent to work in a store in a rural area, where his mission of Da’wah began.
Students from a Christian missionary school would visit the store preaching their beliefs to him, and knowing little more than the shahadah (testifying that no god but Allah and Muhammad is His prophet), he found it difficult to defend his beliefs.
He then stumbled upon a book which carried a religious dialogue between a Muslim imam and a Christian priest, and this proved to be the first of many books which he would read on the subject.He began researching both religions and recording his findings in a notebook, after which he started delivering lectures in South Africa.
First Lecture
His first lecture was entitled “Muhammad (peace be upon him): Messenger of Peace,” at it was delivered in 1940, to 15 people at a cinema in his province.
Within a short space of time, the numbers grew and people crossed the racial divides which were then prevalent in apartheid South Africa, to listen to him, and to participate in the questions and answers sessions which followed his lectures.
Although some Christians and Muslims felt that his style was blunt, many others reverted to Islam, and Da’wah soon began to dominate his life, with the audiences at his lectures reaching forty thousand.
In 1957, Sheikh Deedat, together with two of his friends, founded the Islamic Propagation Center which printed a variety of books and offered classes to new Muslims.
In 1986, he visited Saudi Arabia for a conference, and in his first television interview, enthralled the Arab world with his dynamic personality and in depth knowledge of comparative religion.
He then visited the United Kingdom, Morocco, Kenya, Sweden, Australia and Denmark on lecture and debating tours.
In the United States, he became famous for a debate with the American Reverend Jimmy Swaggart, witnessed by 8,000 people on the topic “Is the Bible the Word of God.”
On May 3, 1996, Sheikh Ahmed Deedat suffered a stroke which left him paralysed from the neck down, and also meant that he could no longer speak or swallow.
He was flown to a hospital in Riyadh, where he was taught to communicate through a series of eye-movements.He spent the last nine years of his life in a bed in his home in Verulam, South Africa, encouraging people to engage in Da’wah.
He continued to receive hundreds of letters of support from around the world.
Sunday, August 07, 2005
The Washington Fatwa
By Walid Phares
August 8, 2005
A number of North American-based Muslim organizations, clerics and activists held a recent press conference in Washington to release a "fatwa against Terrorism." The religious edict, unveiled at a critical time following the London bombings, is certainly the subject of significant interest. First, the timing: It comes after the terrorist attacks against Britain, and it also follows three years of unparalleled horrors perpetrated by jihadist organizations worldwide, including suicide bombings and beheadings of civilians. This "fatwa," issued by American citizens and associations, is the first theological document made public by a number of Muslim groups based in the United States. Other fatwas were issued in Britain and more detailed ones were made public in Saudi Arabia. There are endless questions about this announcement, especially in the minds of the American public. Let's analyze the actual text before we attempt to address a few of these inquiries.
A couple of points deserve mention at the outset: One, we haven't seen an Arabic version of the fatwa, at least not when it was announced. Fatwas are generally issued in Arabic. All Muslims around the world should be able to read them and all clerics should be able to comment on them. That is a matter of inquiry. Two, a religious edict is part of the theological domain, hence its discussion should overlap with Koranic references and other religious sources. But since the authors of the fatwa have tackled a subject of a "political nature," they have therefore opened the edict to the public for discussion as well. In other words, once a fatwa is out, and as long as it deals with public affairs and political matters, it can and would be discussed by all Muslims, even if they aren't of the clerical realm, and by non-Muslims as well, since the fatwa also covers their realm. This note of caution is necessary to prevent the exclusion of anyone from the debate, under the stipulation that "discussing" a fatwa is a "religious matter." This would be true if the subject of the fatwa is strictly theological. But once the crossing into politics and policies is done, it opens the door to free public debate.
Several points are in order:
1. The text states that: "The Fiqh Council of North America wishes to reaffirm Islam's absolute condemnation of terrorism and religious extremism." Had the text been in Arabic, the authors would have to use the term "Irhab." The fatwa would have been stronger had they quoted from religious texts a condemnation of "Irhab."
The American text didn't reference the "absolute condemnation" with a "clear text," which would allow al Qaeda and the jihadists to defeat the fatwa. For the terrorists have often used theological references to convince their followers that indeed "al Irhab" was accepted to mean jihad. Thus, it would have been of greater efficiency to provide theological grounds for the specific rejection of Irhab, translated as terrorism.
2. The fatwa states that "Islam strictly condemns religious extremism and the use of violence against innocent lives." This is another important statement, but it is too general to use in making inroads in the war of ideas against the terrorists. For the question is: Who determines what is an innocent life? How can this statement lead to a specific condemnation of the killing of innocent people in Iraq's Sunni Triangle, Moscow, and Sudan at the hands of jihadists who specifically state in their own fatwas that there are no innocent lives when a jihad is waged? The American fatwa could have been specifically geared to defeat the jihadist ideology.
3. It states that: "There is no justification in Islam for extremism or terrorism. Targeting civilians' lives and property through suicide bombings or any other method of attack is haram -- or forbidden -- and those who commit these barbaric acts are criminals, not 'martyrs.' " Again, it would have been more efficient to respond directly to the jihadists who quote from the Koran and other texts and sources. For example there was no such thing as explosives in the 7th century, yet al Qaeda, its allies and even Sheik Yussuf al-Qardawi on al Jazeera have justified the use of suicide bombing, and called it permissible in certain conditions. Sheik al-Qardawi went as far as linking today's suicide bombing to what he called "inghimass" (to throw oneself against the enemy). According to him, this has been permitted by religious teaching since the early days of Islam. A fatwa issued in the West or in the United States must respond to Sheik al-Qardawi and the jihadists theologically, and not state globally what international law and 52 Muslim countries subscribe to already.
4) The text of the fatwa says: "The Qur'an, Islam's revealed text, states: 'Whoever kills a person [unjustly]... it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.' " (Koran, 5:32). This powerful quote has to supercede all other references al Qaeda uses with regard to the kuffar (infidels) from any source. For the jihadist terrorists would quote the same sentence and simply state that the persons they are killing are "justly" killed. Their ideologues have already responded to this reference by saying that whoever kills outside the injunction of the right jihad is acting as if killing all mankind. The same logic applies to all other quotations in the fatwa: a need for theological response to the jihadists in addition to general quotes.
The fatwa then states that in "light of the teachings of the Qur'an and Sunnah we clearly and strongly state" that:
• "All acts of terrorism targeting civilians are haram (forbidden) in Islam." This is a positive and focused statement. And assuming that international law covers that area already, with legislation, declarations and convention since the 19th century, it would have been basic to insert in the fatwa examples of terrorism aimed at killing innocent civilians, such as children at school, in buses, in pizzerias; civilians at the theater, in workplaces, in subways, etc. It is crucial for fatwas to name al Qaeda's terrorism and specify that the organization's fatwas are illegal and illegitimate and that the clerics issuing them are committing crimes under Islamic and international law.
August 8, 2005
A number of North American-based Muslim organizations, clerics and activists held a recent press conference in Washington to release a "fatwa against Terrorism." The religious edict, unveiled at a critical time following the London bombings, is certainly the subject of significant interest. First, the timing: It comes after the terrorist attacks against Britain, and it also follows three years of unparalleled horrors perpetrated by jihadist organizations worldwide, including suicide bombings and beheadings of civilians. This "fatwa," issued by American citizens and associations, is the first theological document made public by a number of Muslim groups based in the United States. Other fatwas were issued in Britain and more detailed ones were made public in Saudi Arabia. There are endless questions about this announcement, especially in the minds of the American public. Let's analyze the actual text before we attempt to address a few of these inquiries.
A couple of points deserve mention at the outset: One, we haven't seen an Arabic version of the fatwa, at least not when it was announced. Fatwas are generally issued in Arabic. All Muslims around the world should be able to read them and all clerics should be able to comment on them. That is a matter of inquiry. Two, a religious edict is part of the theological domain, hence its discussion should overlap with Koranic references and other religious sources. But since the authors of the fatwa have tackled a subject of a "political nature," they have therefore opened the edict to the public for discussion as well. In other words, once a fatwa is out, and as long as it deals with public affairs and political matters, it can and would be discussed by all Muslims, even if they aren't of the clerical realm, and by non-Muslims as well, since the fatwa also covers their realm. This note of caution is necessary to prevent the exclusion of anyone from the debate, under the stipulation that "discussing" a fatwa is a "religious matter." This would be true if the subject of the fatwa is strictly theological. But once the crossing into politics and policies is done, it opens the door to free public debate.
Several points are in order:
1. The text states that: "The Fiqh Council of North America wishes to reaffirm Islam's absolute condemnation of terrorism and religious extremism." Had the text been in Arabic, the authors would have to use the term "Irhab." The fatwa would have been stronger had they quoted from religious texts a condemnation of "Irhab."
The American text didn't reference the "absolute condemnation" with a "clear text," which would allow al Qaeda and the jihadists to defeat the fatwa. For the terrorists have often used theological references to convince their followers that indeed "al Irhab" was accepted to mean jihad. Thus, it would have been of greater efficiency to provide theological grounds for the specific rejection of Irhab, translated as terrorism.
2. The fatwa states that "Islam strictly condemns religious extremism and the use of violence against innocent lives." This is another important statement, but it is too general to use in making inroads in the war of ideas against the terrorists. For the question is: Who determines what is an innocent life? How can this statement lead to a specific condemnation of the killing of innocent people in Iraq's Sunni Triangle, Moscow, and Sudan at the hands of jihadists who specifically state in their own fatwas that there are no innocent lives when a jihad is waged? The American fatwa could have been specifically geared to defeat the jihadist ideology.
3. It states that: "There is no justification in Islam for extremism or terrorism. Targeting civilians' lives and property through suicide bombings or any other method of attack is haram -- or forbidden -- and those who commit these barbaric acts are criminals, not 'martyrs.' " Again, it would have been more efficient to respond directly to the jihadists who quote from the Koran and other texts and sources. For example there was no such thing as explosives in the 7th century, yet al Qaeda, its allies and even Sheik Yussuf al-Qardawi on al Jazeera have justified the use of suicide bombing, and called it permissible in certain conditions. Sheik al-Qardawi went as far as linking today's suicide bombing to what he called "inghimass" (to throw oneself against the enemy). According to him, this has been permitted by religious teaching since the early days of Islam. A fatwa issued in the West or in the United States must respond to Sheik al-Qardawi and the jihadists theologically, and not state globally what international law and 52 Muslim countries subscribe to already.
4) The text of the fatwa says: "The Qur'an, Islam's revealed text, states: 'Whoever kills a person [unjustly]... it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.' " (Koran, 5:32). This powerful quote has to supercede all other references al Qaeda uses with regard to the kuffar (infidels) from any source. For the jihadist terrorists would quote the same sentence and simply state that the persons they are killing are "justly" killed. Their ideologues have already responded to this reference by saying that whoever kills outside the injunction of the right jihad is acting as if killing all mankind. The same logic applies to all other quotations in the fatwa: a need for theological response to the jihadists in addition to general quotes.
The fatwa then states that in "light of the teachings of the Qur'an and Sunnah we clearly and strongly state" that:
• "All acts of terrorism targeting civilians are haram (forbidden) in Islam." This is a positive and focused statement. And assuming that international law covers that area already, with legislation, declarations and convention since the 19th century, it would have been basic to insert in the fatwa examples of terrorism aimed at killing innocent civilians, such as children at school, in buses, in pizzerias; civilians at the theater, in workplaces, in subways, etc. It is crucial for fatwas to name al Qaeda's terrorism and specify that the organization's fatwas are illegal and illegitimate and that the clerics issuing them are committing crimes under Islamic and international law.
Two - thirds of Muslims considers leaving UK
Vikram Dodd
Tuesday July 26, 2005
The Guardian
Hundreds of thousands of Muslims have thought about leaving Britain after the London bombings, according to a new Guardian/ICM poll.
The figure illustrates how widespread fears are of an anti-Muslim backlash following the July 7 bombings which were carried out by British born suicide bombers.
The poll also shows that tens of thousands of Muslims have suffered from increased Islamophobia, with one in five saying they or a family member have faced abuse or hostility since the attacks.
Police have recorded more than 1,200 suspected Islamophobic incidents across the country ranging from verbal abuse to one murder in the past three weeks. The poll suggests the headline figure is a large underestimate.
The poll came as British Islamic leaders and police met to try to boost recruitment of Muslim officers, improve efforts to protect Muslims from a backlash, and improve the flow of information from Muslims to the police about suspected terrorist activity.
Nearly two-thirds of Muslims told pollsters that they had thought about their future in Britain after the attacks, with 63% saying they had considered whether they wanted to remain in the UK. Older Muslims were more uneasy about their future, with 67% of those 35 or over having contemplated their future home country compared to 61% among those 34 or under.
Britain's Muslim population is estimated at 1.6million, with 1.1million over 18, meaning more than half a million may have considered the possibility of leaving.
Three in 10 are pessimistic about their children's future in Britain, while 56% said they were optimistic.
Nearly eight in 10 Muslims believe Britain's participation in invading Iraq was a factor leading to the bombings, compared to nearly two-thirds of all Britons surveyed for the Guardian earlier this month. Tony Blair has repeatedly denied such a link.
Muslim clerics' and leaders' failure to root out extremists is a factor behind the attacks identified by 57% of Muslims, compared to 68% of all Britons, and nearly two-thirds of Muslims identify racist and Islamophobic behaviour as a cause compared to 57% of all Britons.
The general population and Muslims apportion virtually the same amount of blame to the bombers and their handlers, with eight in 10 or more citing these as factors.
The poll finds a huge rejection of violence by Muslims with nine in 10 believing it has no place in a political struggle. Nearly nine out of 10 said they should help the police tackle extremists in the Islamic communities in Britain.
A small rump, potentially running into thousands, told ICM of their support for the attacks on July 7 which killed 56 and left hundreds wounded - and 5% said that more attacks would be justified. Those findings are troubling for those urgently trying to assess the pool of potential suicide bombers.
One in five polled said Muslim communities had integrated with society too much already, while 40% said more was needed and a third said the level was about right.
More than half wanted foreign Muslim clerics barred or thrown out of Britain, but a very sizeable minority, 38%, opposed that.
Half of Muslims thought that they needed to do more to prevent extremists infiltrating their community.
· ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,005 adults aged 18+ by telephone on July 15-17 2005. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules.
Tuesday July 26, 2005
The Guardian
Hundreds of thousands of Muslims have thought about leaving Britain after the London bombings, according to a new Guardian/ICM poll.
The figure illustrates how widespread fears are of an anti-Muslim backlash following the July 7 bombings which were carried out by British born suicide bombers.
The poll also shows that tens of thousands of Muslims have suffered from increased Islamophobia, with one in five saying they or a family member have faced abuse or hostility since the attacks.
Police have recorded more than 1,200 suspected Islamophobic incidents across the country ranging from verbal abuse to one murder in the past three weeks. The poll suggests the headline figure is a large underestimate.
The poll came as British Islamic leaders and police met to try to boost recruitment of Muslim officers, improve efforts to protect Muslims from a backlash, and improve the flow of information from Muslims to the police about suspected terrorist activity.
Nearly two-thirds of Muslims told pollsters that they had thought about their future in Britain after the attacks, with 63% saying they had considered whether they wanted to remain in the UK. Older Muslims were more uneasy about their future, with 67% of those 35 or over having contemplated their future home country compared to 61% among those 34 or under.
Britain's Muslim population is estimated at 1.6million, with 1.1million over 18, meaning more than half a million may have considered the possibility of leaving.
Three in 10 are pessimistic about their children's future in Britain, while 56% said they were optimistic.
Nearly eight in 10 Muslims believe Britain's participation in invading Iraq was a factor leading to the bombings, compared to nearly two-thirds of all Britons surveyed for the Guardian earlier this month. Tony Blair has repeatedly denied such a link.
Muslim clerics' and leaders' failure to root out extremists is a factor behind the attacks identified by 57% of Muslims, compared to 68% of all Britons, and nearly two-thirds of Muslims identify racist and Islamophobic behaviour as a cause compared to 57% of all Britons.
The general population and Muslims apportion virtually the same amount of blame to the bombers and their handlers, with eight in 10 or more citing these as factors.
The poll finds a huge rejection of violence by Muslims with nine in 10 believing it has no place in a political struggle. Nearly nine out of 10 said they should help the police tackle extremists in the Islamic communities in Britain.
A small rump, potentially running into thousands, told ICM of their support for the attacks on July 7 which killed 56 and left hundreds wounded - and 5% said that more attacks would be justified. Those findings are troubling for those urgently trying to assess the pool of potential suicide bombers.
One in five polled said Muslim communities had integrated with society too much already, while 40% said more was needed and a third said the level was about right.
More than half wanted foreign Muslim clerics barred or thrown out of Britain, but a very sizeable minority, 38%, opposed that.
Half of Muslims thought that they needed to do more to prevent extremists infiltrating their community.
· ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,005 adults aged 18+ by telephone on July 15-17 2005. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules.
Oil pipeline bombed in Axom
Sun Aug 7, 2005 6:58 PM IST
GUWAHATI, Axom - Suspected rebels bombed an oil pipeline in India's troubled northeast on Sunday while police fired on tribal activists blocking highways as part of a campaign for a separate homeland, police said.
Police said four guerrillas had overpowered security men guarding the oil pipeline in Axom state before fixing a bomb to it. There were no reports of injuries to people but the blast killed cattle and caused a fire which damaged homes.
"There was a big fire immediately after the blast and several houses nearby caught fire," a local police officer said by telephone.
An oil industry official said the region's four refineries had sufficient stocks to last for more than a week, and that the damaged pipeline would be repaired within two days.
Police said the separatist United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) was behind the blast. On Saturday, its rebels threw grenades into a crowded market in Guwahati, the region's biggest city, wounding two civilians.
ULFA has warned of more violence if New Delhi ignores its latest offer of talks, made last week. India's Aug. 15 Independence Day has been a target for attacks in the past.
In neighbouring Manipur state, police commandos seeking to end an economic blockade fired on Naga tribesmen, wounding several. Police said the incident took place on the border between Nagaland and Manipur, where hundreds of goods-laden trucks had been stranded.
"If the government is prepared for a war with us we are also ready to fight," said Paul Langhu, chief of a Naga students' union which is leading protests in Manipur.
On Saturday, the Indian government airlifted tonnes of food and medicines to Manipur, where supplies had been cut off for nearly two months.
Members of the 3 million strong Naga tribe, about one-third of whom live outside Nagaland, in Manipur and two other northeastern states, want all the areas they dominate to be united in a "Greater Nagaland".
But Manipuris strongly oppose the division of their state.
The seven states of India's northeast are wracked by separatist and tribal insurgencies. Groups fighting for separate homelands accuse New Delhi of exploiting local mineral resources and neglecting regional economies.
Circled by China, Bhutan, Bangladesh and Myanmar, the northeast region is linked to the Indian mainland by a narrow corridor, just 20 miles wide, through the state of West Bengal.
GUWAHATI, Axom - Suspected rebels bombed an oil pipeline in India's troubled northeast on Sunday while police fired on tribal activists blocking highways as part of a campaign for a separate homeland, police said.
Police said four guerrillas had overpowered security men guarding the oil pipeline in Axom state before fixing a bomb to it. There were no reports of injuries to people but the blast killed cattle and caused a fire which damaged homes.
"There was a big fire immediately after the blast and several houses nearby caught fire," a local police officer said by telephone.
An oil industry official said the region's four refineries had sufficient stocks to last for more than a week, and that the damaged pipeline would be repaired within two days.
Police said the separatist United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) was behind the blast. On Saturday, its rebels threw grenades into a crowded market in Guwahati, the region's biggest city, wounding two civilians.
ULFA has warned of more violence if New Delhi ignores its latest offer of talks, made last week. India's Aug. 15 Independence Day has been a target for attacks in the past.
In neighbouring Manipur state, police commandos seeking to end an economic blockade fired on Naga tribesmen, wounding several. Police said the incident took place on the border between Nagaland and Manipur, where hundreds of goods-laden trucks had been stranded.
"If the government is prepared for a war with us we are also ready to fight," said Paul Langhu, chief of a Naga students' union which is leading protests in Manipur.
On Saturday, the Indian government airlifted tonnes of food and medicines to Manipur, where supplies had been cut off for nearly two months.
Members of the 3 million strong Naga tribe, about one-third of whom live outside Nagaland, in Manipur and two other northeastern states, want all the areas they dominate to be united in a "Greater Nagaland".
But Manipuris strongly oppose the division of their state.
The seven states of India's northeast are wracked by separatist and tribal insurgencies. Groups fighting for separate homelands accuse New Delhi of exploiting local mineral resources and neglecting regional economies.
Circled by China, Bhutan, Bangladesh and Myanmar, the northeast region is linked to the Indian mainland by a narrow corridor, just 20 miles wide, through the state of West Bengal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)