NSA discusses changing dynamics of politics in Nagaland
New Delhi, August 21 (MExN): How does Naga society respond to the changing dynamics of politics in Nagaland? This was subject matter of a Panel Discussion organized by the Naga Scholars’ Association (NSA) at Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University on August 18.
There is need for participatory democracy rather than adhering merely to representative democracy. The discussants advocated for deviation from finger-pointing, reactionary politics to pro-active engagement.
The engagement should focus on solution based activities - based more on conscientious consensus that is reflective of Naga ethos, they noted.
Dr. Walunir Tzudir of Amity University, AC Kharingpam of Jamia Millia Islamia, and James Pochury of ActionAid were panelists in the discussion.
According to a NSA press release, the panel discussion as well as the Question & Answer thereafter veered around the changing phases of politics in Nagaland and evolution of Naga politics.
In his presentation, Dr. Walunir pointed out how Naga politics after “falling in love” with the ideals of democracy have yielded to “rhetoric rather than practical engagements.”
He observed that the Nagas are governed by aliens who are more interested in big talks instead of providing working solutions on the ground level.
Dr. Walunir contrasted the current picture from the politics of 1990’s when there was rejection of money power and argued that the “complete turnabout lies not just with the leaders but the masses.”
Highlighting that tussle for power is again complicated by the rise of different tribal blocs, he noted that they are involved in the process of integration or disintegration at the cost of each other.
he growth of a corrupt bureaucratic system which is more interested in lobbying their gainful interest further aggravates the problem, he maintained.
AC Kharingpam’s argument revolved around the question of what amounts to change and the importance of mapping it out, keeping in mind the reality of existential experiences.
The change in politics is also about what has been left out or denied or what has not been voiced out, he said.
In order to understand change, Kharingpam stressed that it is crucial to “understand the structural ideology of the ruling class, the standings of the nationalist groups, the clergy and the electoral class” which would result in a more comprehensive picture.
To understand this, he proposed a study of various factors that play a decisive role, such as the rise of NPF, with its pan Naga identity; the growth or the receding influence of NPMHR; the framework agreement; the role of church; the demise of student politics such as the NSF and the NSUD; and the rise of regionalism.
The third panelist, James Pochury, stressed on the need for participatory democracy and called for focusing on solutions rather than problems that Nagas are facing today.
The wedge, between the powerless and the powerful, has grown to an extent that there is no easy solution but to engage with systemic issues, he noted. The direction that one needs to look in is how to engage with and strengthen participation at the grassroots level.
The challenge and scope for political activism as a tool of critical engagement to engage with and strengthen participation at the grassroots level, he asserted, lies in asking how the Nagas can be in control of their lives, and to decide how they want to live and let live.
It does not lie in transfer of power from one hegemonic group to another but in the transfer of power to a more “community-centered participatory structure” that is reflective of a “non-centralized system which is more democratic,” he concluded.
The NSA stated that the discussion was followed by Q&A session where the participants interrogated how as a result of jumping the course of development rather than evolving, the Nagas have missed out and how we need to go back.
It also located the lack of “expected revolution” by the citizen to the impending crisis to numerous reasons such as the lack of awareness of basic rights on the part of citizens, the existing system of patron and clients, the existing gap between the elite and the masses, the valorizing of certain sections of people, romanticizing the Naga issue and in the process essentializing it without critical reflection.
