Charles Chasie
Apropos of Mr Sanjoy Hazarika’s article “Going Beyond the Gender Divide in Nagaland”, first published in the Wire and now in the Morung Express (February 21, 2017), quoting me, I feel compelled to respond not just to clear my position but to set the record straight for everyone.
1. I had written two articles in connection with the ULB elections issue – the first was published in three Nagaland papers and the second in two. The present discussion basically involves my first article but I am giving the links to both of them so that any Naga reader, who has not read them before, can do so and form their own independent opinion. http://morungexpress.com/naga-society-lies-wounded/ http://morungexpress.com/naga-society-really-patriarchal/ Any objective reader can understand that I was not against Naga women. My disappointment was how quickly their leaders became political and chose the politics of confrontation quite contrary to the healing role the Naga women had been playing in our society for which all Nagas had shown respect to them.
2. I had said that Naga society cannot be categorized as “patriarchal”. I said it was more “patrilineal” and I gave the dictionary meaning of patrilineal. I said I cannot speak for the other tribes but for the Angami, patriarchy was not possible. If any Angami disagrees with this view, I am willing to discuss the issue with them at any time. I also said, in Naga society, it was never men vrs women and that in our society it was always more a partnership between men and women, or husband and wife. Because people from other cultures may not fully understand the values of our society and how we operate, I published my articles in Nagaland papers although at least one national paper had also requested me to write. My point was that we all see things through our cultural eyes and we need to respect one another’s cultures, the only unique thing we each have as a people.
3. I have been attacked for saying I wished the Naga women leaders had accepted the nomination of 40-50% offered by the tribe leaders, at least by APO, way more than the 33% reservation and avoided the confrontation. The above article says that the 33% reservation was more important as Naga women wanted to contest and which was why they refused the nomination offer. This brings us to the next important point.
4. Was any Naga, at any point of time, against Naga women standing for election to any post? At least I have not come across such a position from anyone. Instead some men were saying why should there be 33% reservation for women when they are free to contest any election to any post. Why just ULBs? Why not MLA and MP also? But as we know this will not lead anywhere and women will not get elected to positions of political decision-making, at least not in significant numbers. So, I expressed my disappointment about the Naga women leaders not accepting the “nomination” offer and also that the women leaders had not apparently made homework on how to place Naga women of ability in positions of decision-making. Are these expressions against promoting the interests of Naga women?
5. This brings us to the most important/crucial point. Was the ULB elections even a gender issue?! Most Nagas have already expressed their opinions, even in the newspapers, that the ULB elections was not a gender issue at all as far as the Nagas are concerned. But a few people decided to make the ULB election a gender issue. Even a Naga writer was quoted, in the article, to say that Naga women had achieved so much more than Naga men that Naga men have become afraid of Naga women and that such threat perception had even led to Naga Hoho splitting into at least three Naga men-led tribe bodies. How ridiculous can one get?! I had some pat replies ready but I will refrain myself because I am sure the supporters of such claims have only managed to expose themselves before Naga society. I would also be the happiest if the Naga women leaders would themselves contest the elections. I may not be able to do much but I will certainly support them, even go to their constituencies and canvass for them if they want.
6. Courts and legal provision have been cited to prove the weakness of my contentions. There have also been talks of other Articles of the Constitution taking precedence over Article 371A. I have all the respect for the Constitution and courts and the officials there. But we also need to be clear about some things. The courts and even the Constitution are made by the people and law-makers. The Courts interpret the laws. But are they really sacrosanct? The Indian Constitution has been amended so many times, only proving its fallibility and need for improvement from time to time. Or, can the courts decide whether a people’s culture or civilization is right or wrong? The writer himself admits that the Constitution is an amalgam of so many parts. Here, it may not be out of place to mention the published statement of a former Speaker of the Nagaland Legislative Assembly, a few days ago in Nagaland newspapers, that without Article 371A of the Indian Constitution, the legitimacy of Nagas and Nagaland being in India may give rise to questions. Side by side with that was the article of a long-standing and well-known Indian woman human rights activist who cautioned Naga women to reflect well on what might actually be happening in the name of women’s rights?
7. There are some other points about fundamental rights and no man being an island etc. I will not go into more but just mention that Nagas, because of their situation and history, have had to adjust, adapt and evolve more than most other peoples, including those who may be making judgements on the Nagas at this time. We do not dispute their right to express their opinions.
Nagas are a people who still don’t where they came from or what has made them a people – the strong emotional attachment to the word “Naga” seems to be the only common thread. What is worse, no governmental or tribe bodies seem interested to find out! The Naga tribes are all so different. Not surprisingly, our peoplehood has always been fragile and vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation, even by our own people.
But despite all our weaknesses, we have not only survived till today but also made significant achievements and contributions. This is no mean achievement. True, Nagas may not be as sophisticated or clever like people from some other cultures, including from our neighbourhood. But, in terms of achievements, if we consider from where we all began, we are not less than anyone. And Nagas can hold their heads high. And Naga future is in Naga hands if we decide to make it so.
