The road to peace in Assam has hit a dead-end with the government and United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) failing to find a level playing ground to facilitate a dialogue. ULFA has made it clear that they would come to the negotiating table only if the issue of sovereignty for Assam is discussed; the government whereas has categorically ruled out the demand for sovereignty. Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi asserted on the floor of the state assembly that "ULFA's demand for sovereignty is a tactic to delay the peace process, as there is no question of holding discussion on country's sovereignty." Thus, the hope for peace raised with the peaceful conduct of National Games following ULFA's withdrawal of the boycott call, seems to have ended in a deadlock.

At this juncture, adding fuel to the fire is a call by Paresh Barua, the ULFA Chief, in the ULFA mouthpiece Freedom, demanding a plebiscite under international supervision on Assam's sovereignty. This is not the first time that ULFA has demanded a plebiscite to resolve the Assam question. The recent outburst is, in fact, a reaction to a recently conducted opinion poll in Assam by an organization called the Assam Public Works revealing that more than ninety five per cent of Assamese people do not identify with the demand for a sovereign Assam. ULFA termed the poll as the handiwork of the state police and Indian intelligence. However, Assam Public Works is actually an organization of close relatives of the ULFA members.

Disturbingly, the common people in Assam are bearing the brunt of the crossfire between violence unleashed by ULFA and the counter-insurgency operations launched by the security forces. Moreover, following the dastardly massacre of Hindi-speaking minorities by the ULFA in January leading to the killing of around 70 migrant workers in separate attacks, many Hindi-speaking minority families find themselves languishing in government relief camps. They can neither go home nor to their jobs because the government feels it would be safer to keep them here. No steps have yet been taken to make these people feel safe and secure; no mechanism has been put in place to ensure proper equipment of the relief camps with clean and hygienic facilities. Moreover, ULFA has warned the Hindi-speaking people to stay out of Assam, threatening to unleash more violence against them. Keeping this in view, it becomes imperative to have a proper institutional mechanism in place to ensure the safety and security of migrant labourers in Assam.

Adding another twist to the story, the reported nexus between ULFA-ISI and ULFA-Bangladesh has crucial implications for the security and integrity of the region. Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi had accused the ISI as being the invisible hand behind the brutal massacre of Hindi-speaking people in the state by ULFA. Further, a leading US think tank Strategic Foresight Inc (also known as Stratfor), has reported in its study on the general elections expected to be held later this year and the prevailing political situation in Bangladesh, that ULFA has pumped in over six million dollars to fund major political parties in the Bangladesh elections. The funds have reportedly gone to at least 15 candidates belonging to both the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and the Awami League. This report also claimed that ULFA was "hedging its bets in order to protect its militant and business operations in Bangladesh should either party win". The think-tank said that ULFA's core leadership is believed to have been living in luxury in that country for 15 years "under the protection of its political allies in Dhaka". Certain sources further claim that ULFA is also strengthening its links with the Islamic radical groups in Assam like the MULTA (Muslim United Liberation Tigers of Assam), which has contacts with the Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) of Bangladesh.

If true, these allegations stand to present a serious threat to the peace process in the region necessitating the government to approach the issue cautiously and diplomatically. The 3rd March declaration by Bangladesh, claiming that it would not provide refuge to ultras fleeing from the North East and that it would take steps to check infiltration from its side, is a gesture that merits appreciation. However, it is yet to be seen as to how far this gesture would get translated into action. Adequate steps need to be taken to avoid future attacks by ULFA. Its positive response to the call by prominent sports personalities to withdraw its National Games boycott call demonstrates that a greater participation of civil society in the peace process may facilitate a much needed breakthrough in the deadlock.