Witoubou Newmai
Given the most favourable and opportune time for the Nagas and the Meiteis to continue engaging with the ‘elephant in the room’, both the groups should take full advantage of the sense of genial atmosphere pervading the landscape without any hesitation. The idea is broached, as one is quite concerned regarding the durability and continuity, of such rare congeniality.
To begin with, it is important to underscore the typical situation where the Nagas and the Meiteis are in. As a way of considering the situation, it is prudent for both the Nagas and the Meiteis to be extra cautious about factors which can drown their efforts in fatuity. This column is reiterating and advocating for such engagement with the premise that: ‘time’ such as this which is different from ‘any other time,’ may not come again that soon, given the configuration in all aspects.
Given that the prevailing ‘congeniality’ is also reflective of how both the parties have shed their pre-dialogue postures (not positions); it will not be difficult now to shed past ‘hesitations.’ Under such an atmosphere, to explore a framework of engagement will also become easier. As one situation strengthens to create the next desired situation, the impossibility to face the ‘truth’ with honesty, which used to be the impediment, may begin to dissipate, enabling further engagement.
The connotation of this expression is all about bringing concerned groups to the positions where they can accept the ‘truth.’ In other words, unless the required courage is not garnered to accept the ‘truth’, that ‘truth’ will continue to disturb someone. In such an eventuality, dialogue process will be akin to the remark of “hunting in the morning, fishing in the afternoon, criticising in the evening and abusing at night.” Those who indulge in this way are evidently deficient in their understanding about the tenets of engaging in dialogue.
So what is that ‘truth’ in context?
The history of the Nagas and the Meiteis should be the basis. Prior to coming to this stage of dialogue process, there is bound to be a tussle of “Their Truth” and “My Truth.”
This is the critical point of dialogue process, but the concerned groups must defiantly consider what it takes to engage such situation without leaving the table. Though hard the process is, unless this is not the case, any other effort will be just another stultifying conformity that will lead to square one.