U A Shimray
Sometimes, I wonder if God created Manipur when He is in bad mood… No appropriate word is found to describe the present ethno-political situation in the region particularly Manipur state. We are good in accusing one another, best in pointing fingers, keen in dealing dirty business, enthusiastically sympathetic in lip service but hardly bother the facts. Facts cannot express themselves until and unless someone interpreted for them. Salman caution that facts “shift” depending on the interpreter.
Today, Manipur is endowed with dozens of insurgent outfits, several civil society and student organizations and NGOs. From here, many leaders emerge, several demands are placed, countless memoranda and statements are issued and exercise agitation in the name of democratic complaint. In such situation, collusion for power struggle and organisational hegemony is inevitable. In this hegemony politics, who hold the ownership rights of the peoples’ loyalty? Indeed, presence of so many organisations, unions, Lups does create mess and confusion. Felix Cat’s article “Blockheads” (Imphal Free Press, July 25, 2005) describes bluntly the present status of Manipur as public latrine. He writes, “(E)verybody does their dirty business in it, nobody takes responsibility for the mess they made, everybody blames each other for the mess and the stink, nobody wants to come forward to clean up the mess, their mess, any mess. And everyone still uses it anyway.” Likewise, the facts are also put in mess. In the midst of “emotional politics” we mess up the facts, sex up the issues, politicize and abuse the facts… but never democratise the facts and justify it.
It is openly acknowledged that there is “inevitable” understanding between the civil society organisations and undergrounds…sophisticated nexus between the politicians and undergrounds. This nexus is “critically indispensable” for both the social organisations and politicians. And the philosophy is you don’t “survive” in the land of insurgency. So, this philosophy becomes the main theme of development, political paradigm and weaknesses.
Indeed, the Naga ceasefire vis-à-vis the political dimension in the region turns resilient. The 1960s Naga ceasefire hardly matters, but current Naga ceasefire causes so much uneasiness putting the ethnic relationship at the critical situation. The crucial focus is the tag “territory”. The claim of, “I am Naga, I deserve ceasefire in my house, in my village and the region I live” but such claim is contested that ceasefire is “null and void”. Many non-Nagas organisations favour Naga peace talks and considering as “Ideal Framework”. At the same time, they oppose imposition of ceasefire to the Nagas inhabiting areas of Manipur.
In the name of “Integrity Day”, Manipur State is facing inevitable social disintegration and animosity. This tricky integration and its political equation are a dangerous game. Topographically Manipur is divided into the Hills (Chin) and Plains (Tam), with its population categorised as tribals and non-tribals. Ethnically there are more than 30 odd groups and the dominant religious segregation is Hindu, Christian and Muslim. In this pluralistic condition, the best option is appreciating symbiotic relationship. However, the question here is how much and at what level we are accommodating each other. The result is nothing- instead we just tease one another’s sentiment, abuse the facts and interpret it in their own terms.
Another weakness in the society is allowing an intolerant mindset to play important role in given situation. One significant issue where the intolerance mindset does the role is the political tussle over State’s declaration of 18 June as Gazette Holiday. No one really tries to reason the sentiment of the Nagas and also passion behind the Manipur’s territorial integration campaigners. Interestingly, when such sensitive (ethnic) issue is on, we sweetly talk about the historical sentiment of Chin-Tam relationship, my brothers, my sisters… but when the issue is cooled down, we simply forget. Or, is the quest of peaceful ethnic relationship conditioned by the Naga politics? Here, another “double standard” in this tricky integration business. The real integration does not come through statement or debate but reaching out the people and acknowledging the facts and realities.
Let me also cite the mindset of non-accommodating- the simmering Population Census problem and proposed Delimitation in Manipur state. The attitude intrinsically hurt the people living in the hills. The main issue is losing five Assembly Constituencies in valley areas, which inevitably rouse ethnic sentiment and passion of the valley people particularly majority Meiteis. The whole blame simply goes to the people of Senapati district for miscalculating the population figure (No one complain when there was a big mistake in the tribal figure in Tamenglong district in 1981). What we understand in the politics of population is that it has a crucial meaning in determining political and economic strength of any political territory. This is essentially true if ethnic groups dominate in specific territories and there is centralization of power within themselves. Under these circumstances, the dominant group(s) exercises control over resources both human and materials. The goal of such contest is to increase the economic and political power of an ethnic group relative to other group and the method by which this is achieved entails the increase in size of one population to others.
In such juncture, facts become the first casualty. As said, facts depends on how it is interpreted- the facts one believe may not be others’ interest or vice versa…Here, the most important is mutual understanding and accepting the facts and realities. In social relationship emotional attachment is very crucial, also good politics, economic dependency, regional cooperation is the foremost theme of real integration. In this plural social co-existence one cannot isolate the others. It is like a “food chain” in the animal kingdom. Here, what we need is decency in statesmanship.
