Dilemma of nation-state politics

Manipur is back in the news. After the two-month long cease-all-activities in the Imphal valley subsided it is now the turn of the hills to come alive, not with music but with political bludgeons. If it were not for the untimely deaths of young souls, first in the valley during the Inner Line Permit System stir and, later, when the hills of Churachandpur turned ablaze, one would have ignored these events as yet another one of many protests that define the political culture of Manipur. Alas the lives of two innocent souls with so much to look forward to have been extinguished, not by the Assam Rifles who would have been accused of taking cover under the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, but by the Manipur Commando, a deadly strike force known for its ruthless, sharpshooting skills.

The civil society of Churachandpur protested against what was seen as a surreptitious effort by Imphal and all those in league with the “government” (which includes the hill MLAs) in passing three Bills perceived as adversarial to the interests of the hill tribes, but which the Manipur government claims is ostensibly for the protection of the indigenous people of the state.

The three contentious Bills are The Protection of Manipur People Bill, 2015, the Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms (seventh amendment) Bill, 2015 and the Manipur Shops and Establishments (second amendment) Bill, 2015. The people of Churachandpur district who were at the forefront of the protest feel that the Bills were arbitrarily passed by the Manipur assembly which came under pressure from the Joint Action for Inner Line Permit System, a valley-based conglomerate of pressure groups. Since the cut-off year for determining the citizenship of a resident is 1951, many of the hill tribes feel they might be dispossessed of Indian citizenship since a substantial number might have crossed over from Myanmar after the cut-off year (and are perhaps still crossing over).

Advertisement

In fact, my neighbours who are Tangkhuls from Ukhrul, narrate wonderful stories of how their kinsmen from those unchartered territories of Myanmar come over to buy food items and other utilities, stay back with their families for a day or two and then return to those formidable jungles. These are realities that the Indian state fails to understand. The borders are porous and kinship ties are precious for the tribes. Hence, a geographical border separating these blood ties are seen as insignificant, temporary hindrances.

Considering that life on the other side of the border is tough, as narrated by journalist Rajeev Bhattacharjee in his book, Rendezvous with the Rebels, after he returned from the three-month sojourn in “Eastern Nagaland”, who does not want a lesser challenging terrain to live in and an easier land to farm on? It is common sense to believe that many who cross over from the other side would at some point choose to stay back. Nothing prevents them from doing so. It is also not tough to get citizenship papers in a state and region known for blatant corruption. Hence a cut-off year of 1951 is unwelcome.

Noted journalist and editor of Imphal Free Press Pradip Phanjoubam, in his write-up in The Wire, attributes the recent turmoil in Churachandpur to the lack of communication between the Meitei agitators in four valley districts or the Nagas and Kuki-Zomi groups in the hills. He says they failed to reach out and try to understand each other on the matter. To expect any kind of consensus between the different ethnic groups in Manipur is to ask for the impossible. While it can be said of the Meiteis that they seek to continually enshrine and preserve a vision of Manipur from one period of its past, which is that of a kingdom and themselves as people of that glorious heritage, this also robs them of the infinite possibility for adjustment in the 67-year-old nation-state. The Kukis and Nagas, on the other hand, have their own vision of a homeland within the same state.

A confluence of factors have strained the civic discourse to breaking point. It is virtually impossible today for the three groups to sit and chalk out a common vision for Manipur. One only has to scan the social media to see the malice underlying the statements from each group.

For political commentators like this one who have watched Manipur go into contortions every now and again, one reads reports from that state with a weary cynicism. But there are times when cynicism won’t cut and one has to state a few facts with the directness that is purged of ambiguities. One can do that sitting in Shillong.

It would be difficult for a journalist from the Imphal valley or one from the hill districts to take an objective, pragmatic view of the current issue. The ethnic divisions run deep and people have taken postures that would be difficult to come out of. While there will be an article or two from some valley-based scholars or thinkers or journalists trying their best to interpret to the outside world the realities of Manipur, they cannot but leave their imprints on those write-ups. The prejudices do not miss the trained eye. Perhaps the need to be accepted as part of the ethnic family and the idea that one&’s ethnic group has been at the receiving end (all three major ethnic groups in Manipur feel the same; they feel wronged by the government of India if not by their own elected representatives) renders journalism a single-prism activity and the rigour of scholarship dispensable for the time being while the topic of discourse is “Manipur”. The absence of honest internal critique is what prevents issues from being resolved.

Charles M Blow, in an article, “Who love America?”, says, “Our allegiance must not be blind to be true. We must acknowledge our warts if we are to proclaim our beauty.” Blow is one journalist who has stood unflinchingly against the ongoing racist attacks in America where white American cops can pull the trigger on any African-American “trouble-maker” without thinking twice.

The stereotyping of an entire race as being lawbreakers is very troubling but that is the same yardstick we adopt in the North-eastern region of India which is home to over 300 ethnic groups. That each ethnic group desires the fulfilment of its political, social, cultural and economic aspirations cannot be a fault. The fault is when one ethnic group perceives that it is unique; that it possesses a unique history (which is, of course, an oral narrative that changes with time), and then demands certain rights and privileges from the nation-state on the basis of that uniqueness.

The nation-state that has to deal with several contesting ethnicities cannot respond to this posturing by a single group, even when such group decides to use armed tactics to achieve those aspirations. The only response is fire for fire and bullet for bullet. This has been the story of an otherwise beautiful region with beautiful people who are still struggling to be part of a nation-state they don’t understand.

Each time Manipur erupts one sees several articles written by mainstream journalists with just a passing understanding of the region and doling out their patronising verbiage. Such write-ups again stereotype the region and its people as a population that has been wronged and which deserves greater empathy from the nation-state. To such writers I would say that this region has received more than its fair share of development funds but those funds have returned to the mainland and are invested in private assets there.

So there is really no need to shed a tear for this region. The rulers have made it in life. It is the people who deserve a better deal but then it&’s us, the people, who elect the rulers. So let&’s get out of the blame game and start undoing the mess we have created.

 

The author is Editor, The Shillong Times, and member, National Security Advisory Board. She can be contacted at patricia17@rediffmail.com

Advertisement