Tuesday, 4 October, 2022
HomeThePrint EssentialWho are India's Bru people, the community that doesn't want to go...

Who are India’s Bru people, the community that doesn’t want to go back ‘home’

Centre has launched 9th attempt to repatriate the over 30,000 Brus from relief camps in Tripura to Mizoram. It insists this will be the last attempt.

Text Size:

Aizawl: On 3 October, the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, along with the state governments of Tripura and Mizoram, began the ninth attempt to repatriate more than 30,000 internally-displaced people from the Bru community from six relief camps in north Tripura, where they have been living for over two decades now.

However, like the previous ones, this attempt, which is set to conclude on 30 November, too seems to be heading towards futility, with only about 125 families having returned to Mizoram so far. This, despite the central government announcing cash doles, land allocations and insisting that this would be the last such attempt.

Brus have protested several times against the attempted repatriation in the three weeks since it began, and have also petitioned Union Home Minister Amit Shah with various demands. Community leaders, in fact, had agreed to plans adopted by a joint committee of representatives of the three governments, relief camp leaders, Bru leaders in Mizoram itself and Mizo groups, but later revoked that agreement.

ThePrint explains who the Bru people are, why they are refugees in Tripura, and why they are being repatriated.


Also read: Why first phase of Bru refugee movement from Tripura to Mizoram failed


Who are the Bru people?

The Bru community is known by different names and its members are spread over at least three north-eastern states — Tripura, Mizoram and parts of southern Assam.

The Brus are ethnically distinct from the Mizos, and the two tribes speak mutually unintelligible languages/dialects, unlike Mizos and Kukis, who share close linguistic and cultural ties and were usually referred to as Kuki-Lushai tribes in colonial times (Lushai or Lusei is the most prominent clan in what is now the Mizo community).

In Tripura, where the Brus are the most populous tribe after the Tripuris, they are known as Reangs, and were almost 2 lakh strong during the 2011 Census. In Mizoram, they are largely referred to by other tribes as ‘Tuikuk’. But in the past two decades or so, they have been increasingly referred to as Bru, a nomenclature of their own choosing.

There are over 40,000 Brus living in four districts of Mizoram, while about 32,000 Brus from Mizoram currently reside in relief camps in northern Tripura.


Also read: Mizoram might be small, but it offers us big lessons in peacemaking


What made them flee to Tripura?

About half the Bru population in Mizoram fled to Tripura in 1997 following ethnic clashes with the Mizos. That year, Bru leaders had demanded an Autonomous District Council (ADC) for the tribe under the 6th Schedule of the Constitution in the western areas of Mizoram, where they were present in sizable numbers but where Mizos formed the majority.

While there were verbal duels between Mizo and Bru groups, a hitherto unknown Bru militant group, calling itself the Bru National Liberation Front, kidnapped and murdered a Mizo forest department employee in the Dampa Tiger Reserve.

The killing led to an upheaval, and Bru thatched huts in several villages in Mizoram’s western periphery were burnt by enraged Mizo villagers. The Brus, egged on by their leaders, fled to Tripura over several months, despite exhortations from political leaders and officials not to.


Also read: The jugular as the Achilles’ heel


Why are they being repatriated?

Tripura is keen that the Brus return to Mizoram, since they add to the sizeable tribal population, and because the land occupied by the relief camps is owned by domicile tribals.

The MHA foots the bill and oversees the task of repatriation, while the Tripura and Mizoram governments handle the exercise on the ground.

The current repatriation is the ninth attempt to bring back Brus to Mizoram, the first having taken place as long ago as 2000. The eight previous attempts have been less than successful, with just over 9,000 Brus returning. The Centre has labelled this the final attempt at repatriation, but then again, each attempt since 2013 has been called that.

As early as 2010, the Centre had concurred with both the Mizoram and the Tripura governments that “unscrupulous elements of the relief camps of Tripura” were attempting to derail the repatriation attempt. In 2013, the ministry began to state it would stop doling out rations to relief camp inmates who did not take part in the repatriation, and presume “they are no more refugees”.

The current attempt too is likely to be unsuccessful, as some relief camp Bru groups have reportedly rekindled demands for an ADC. Most recently, a consortium of groups this week marched 15 km in protest from the relief camps to a northern Tripura town, and demanded Mizoram cease sending vehicles to transport them as part of the repatriation attempt. The vehicles have largely returned empty, as only 125 families have been repatriated in this attempt.


Also read: Mizoram PMAY beneficiaries have congratulatory letters but no houses, state dept is ‘sorry’


 

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube & Telegram

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism

17 COMMENTS

  1. If foreign ownership gaints like Amazon, flipkart continue like this their will be no smaller retailers remain in the market. Since smaller retailers will not have sustainability in such compitition, they have to perish.
    The profits made by online vendors even after discounted rates will go to their foreign owners as foreign exchange, which will put strain on indian economy only. By giving heavy discount on products theses portals reduce the profit margins of manufactures eventually affects our domestic employees and dealers.
    Whereas offline retailers do sell the products at MRP but the total profit margins is shared at three to four stages by manufacturer, distributor, wholesaler and retailer. This Profits do generate more employment and new ventures which helps the economy to grow many folds
    The government has safeguard the interests of the local business community.
    And lesson has to be learnt from this by the local retailers that after all the consumer is the king of the maket, if they do not do business ethically they have to perish.

  2. Isko kya taklif ho rahi agar koi offline me lutne ke bajae online pe sasta mil ja raha to chor hai sala khud to loot raha desh ko customers ka kuch paisa bach raha to b isko taklif ho rahi

  3. Then why don’t they sell gold at 2000 per gram and flats at 50 % discounts these culprits are spoiling retail market. And small
    and medium shopkeepers

  4. Strange the same govt had no issues with “predatory pricing” by a telecom operator which was then presented as “making things affordable and a inclusive approach”. This approach lead to the Virtual end of the telecom industry. And now they have issues with Amazon because they are making things affordable for the masses. Nice

  5. If govt can restrict the ecom for giving discount then it can also be restricted that retailers shouldn’t charge more than 10% as profits for their products.

  6. Here what is the problem they are giving discounts people are getting that product at a cheap price? It’s the mistake of Amazon and Flipkart then the government is gone made. Govt should stay away from these matters.

  7. Neither this government will do any good nor let anybody do it.

    By the way, is this the same minister who said Einstein discovered gravity?

  8. Some or most of the customers are definitely benefited no doubt by e-commerce. However one has to give a thought of retail, off line business. When Rules are hard and strict on retail business, why not on foreign mnc gaints. There is no level playing field. How would Govt. Provide employment to the people as retail business is one mode of self employment. If the retail business is destroyed, God only save majority of the family. The employment senario being not rosy.

  9. Is me Unka Ghaata..Tera Kuch Nahi Jaata…. End Of the day Customers(Public) is saving little bit of Hard Earned Money….They(E Commerce) r making Jobs as well or else in Offline Stores how many Jobs will b there???

  10. Great step by modi government which is affecting employment provided by stores, next bold step by modi govt will be banning of e- pharmacies like medlife and 1 mg

  11. It is the shopowners who have made their destiny like this. Earlier they exploited the customers maximum. Now they can’t do. If amazon and Flipkart can give offers, why can’t the shopkeepers’ . Let the shopowners also realise their mistakes.

  12. Involvement of government to prevent the lower prices is determent to the very capitalist market strategy. No vendor can sell for losses. With the e-commerce in picture now we how much profit margin the brick and mortar stores pack in the sale price. At the end the normal person gets affected. The govt should not encourage bad behavior of small businesses and instead let them compete. After all Amazon or Flipkart don’t make any products and if they are selling lower price it means it means whoever makes these products make enough profits so all is well. Govt : please stay out of messing with competition. If you recall that is how all the public sector undertakinga were performing so inefficiently in the last 4-5 decades.

Comments are closed.

Most Popular

×