By Patricia Mukhim
Manipur is in a crisis today. Its largest hospital, the Regional Institute of Medical Sciences, has stopped all routine surgeries as critical life-saving oxygen cylinders are exhausted. There is an acute shortage of medicines and other essential commodities in the state.
A litre of petrol sells at Rs 200 while an LPG cylinder costs Rs 1,500. Rice, the staple food of the North-east, is selling at Rs 60-70 a kg.
So critical is the situation that the Manipur government will import 1,000 tonnes of rice from Myanmar. The Manipur Industrial Development Corporation, which is engaged in promoting small-scale industries and border trade, has been asked by the state government to import the rice. This, indeed, is an extraordinary situation.
What is ironic is Delhi’s response to the crisis. When Union home secretary GK Pillai was interviewed on a national news channel about this grave situation, all he said was that the Centre did not foresee that allowing Muivah to visit his birthplace would create such an unwarranted situation.
There can be no denying here that there was a goof-up somewhere. To do a post mortem serves no purpose. What needs to be done now is to end the economic blockade on NH 39.
A national highway serves more than one state. Many of the Northeastern states are landlocked and roads are the only economical means of transporting goods. These roads cross over many states. Hence, if there is a blockade organized by one state, the others suffer for no fault of theirs.
So if the country has a Railway Protection Force, is it not high time to raise a NH Protection Force as well? Given the proclivity of different groups in the Darjeeling Hills and Manipur to use the tactics of blockading a lifeline as a leverage, it is high time the Centre came up with a more pragmatic model of demolishing self-centred blockade organizers and took stringent action against all those who use a national highway as a bargaining chip without for a moment considering the humanitarian crisis they have caused.
The Nagalim-Manipur issue is political dynamite that is unlikely to see an early solution. Until then, can NH-39 be held hostage to win the battle of nerves between the Central government and the NSCN(IM)? Or can any group anywhere use a national highway to paralyse the economy and hit at ordinary non-combatants? In a democracy every issue can be discussed.
A successful negotiation, however, is always premised on the win-win formula. If one side wishes to get all the concessions while another gets none, that is blackmail, not negotiation.
The Northeast states have been established or formed under the North Eastern Areas Reorganisation Act (1971), which says, “On and from the appointed day there shall be established a new state, to be known as the State of Manipur, comprising the territories which immediately before that day were comprised in the Union Territory of Manipur.”
The present boundaries of Manipur have remained fixed since the controversial transfer on lease of Kabaw Valley to Myanmar in 1834. In 1953, Jawaharlal Nehru presented Kabaw Valley to that country.
Since Manipur was born, the hill districts of Chandel, Tamenglong, Senapati and Ukhrul have actively participated in the modern constitutional democratic processes of the Indian state.
Of the 38 years of Manipur’s statehood, two of the chief ministers that have ruled were Tangkhuls from Ukhrul – Yangmasho Shaiza and Rishang Keishing.
Between the two of them, they ruled Manipur for more than 13 years. Shaiza was chief minister for over three years, interspersed by bouts of President’s Rule. Keishing ruled for over 10 years.
Between 1981 and 1986, he was the uninterrupted chief minister. He was re-elected and ruled until 1988. He came back to the hot seat in 1994 and was chief minister until 1997. Manipur was under President’s Rule for three years and eight months. The state also had a Pangal Muslim chief minister in Mohammed Alimuddin, who ruled for a year and some months. This is indicative of the inclusive nature of Manipur politics until identity became an instrument of negotiation.
To that extent, therefore, it cannot be said that the minority communities have no say in Manipur’s politics. In a state with a population of 2.3 million (2001 Census), the Meiteis constitute about 55 per cent; the tribals, comprising the Tangkhuls, Maos, Marams, Zeliangrongs, Kukis, Hmars, Paites, Vaipheis, Marings and Anals, make up 23 per cent; and the rest are Pangal Muslims, Nepalis, Bengalis, migrant labourers and business people from elsewhere in India.
It would be fair to mention that some of the minor tribes, particularly those from Chandel district, were ascribed the Naga identity fairly recently perhaps because of the safety in numbers. In the 60-member Assembly, 20 seats are reserved for Scheduled Tribe candidates.
Until the arrival of the NSCN(IM) there appeared to be a fairly harmonious relationship between the hills and valleys of Manipur. Of course, there have been disgruntled voices from amongst the tribes about the propensity of the Meiteis to appropriate all state resources, including employment facilities.
But all this could have been resolved by affirmative state action, which is not impossible in a country whose Constitution is highly flexible. If things have reached a point of no-return, who do we blame?
Not the common people certainly! Their stake in politics is limited to voting. Following that, they have very little say in the identity dialectics, including the current imbroglio and the Mao Gate impasse.
What has aggravated the matter further is the compulsion of Naga civil society groups in Nagaland to adopt tough, belligerent stances instead of taking a non-partisan stance aimed at resolving what someone has rightly termed the “biggest man-made humanitarian crisis”.
Even in a state of war, international conventions do not allow for such embargoes, particularly on life-saving items and food.
The Joint Parliamentary meeting of Nagaland legislators has urged the contending parties to stop the “paper war”. Indeed, this standoff at Mao Gate has become, for some, an opportunity to conduct a full-scale war through the media. Consider this statement by the Nagaland People’s Movement for Human Rights co-autographed by Neingulo Krome and Rose Mary Dzuvichu, “The Nagas are fully aware that after more than six decades of political struggle, our future is bound together not only with our neighbors but also with the world’s community in a global village. But if our aspiration to attain our rightful humanity is constantly denied, we would rather face the challenges with the worth of human person than to live with humiliation.”
It is difficult to comprehend what the statement wishes to convey. Is this throwing the gauntlet to the Indian state and to Manipur? The sub-text is difficult to accommodate in a modern state where people of different races live in different geographical locations.
This is a world where “homelands” are getting blurred and may soon become irrelevant. Homelands become the spaces that provide us economic opportunities. Kinship ties are built no longer around ethnic groups but around a community we work and spend maximum time with.
This is a globalised world where cultures, races and nationalities are being churned and the product is just a human being. The human being has to struggle as an individual because the collective will soon becomes unrecognisable and untenable while negotiating for a better space and a better future.
Moreover, the Naga struggle has a history and a perspective. Things should not be judged from this single incident and the current crisis created by Muivah’s proposed visit to Somdal village in Ukhrul. The timing is not coincidental but strategically planned.
This is politics at its best. So if the Manipur chief minister is also pulling all the punches to play the same kind of politics, why does everything suddenly transform into a huge emotional issue? Surely there must be a better way forward.
To my mind, only a sane and non-partisan civil society emerging from the two contending sides and without any baggage should be able to bring an end to the impasse at Mao Gate. Civil societies are not meant to be burdened by competitive politics. The Indo-Naga talks can continue at its own pace.
**The writer is editor, The Shillong Times, and can be contacted at patricia17@rediffmail.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment