By Golan Naulak
Our political culture and means of settling disputes have been encapsulated within frameworks of rigid practices. Unique problems throw up new questions that call for a fresh look at our existing list of possible answers. The announcement of polling dates for Nagaland has been received with a sense of helplessness of having to have another procedural election without a viable solution to the ongoing Indo-Naga talks. A proposal from a non-Naga body to end the deadlock through the creation of an Autonomous Tribal State in Manipur under the provisions of the Constitution can provide a possible way out, beyond the categories given by both Indian government and Naga groups.
Aspirations and expediency
A meaningful solution on the Naga issue requires serious re-thinking at many levels. For one, the NSCN(IM) do not, and cannot be considered to represent the will of the Nagas. This is not to disregard its role and work in the ongoing peace-making process. Rather, it is to argue for a solution on a broader spectrum that involves wider representation and reach. At best, the group represents an important and powerful voice amongst the Nagas, and is a vital part of the peace process. A solution, even if it has to come in stages, would be more plausible if and only if all the parties to the Indo-Naga peace process are consulted on the same table. Different settlements with various Naga groups are unlikely to solve the issue; in fact, it is more likely to result in an ‘enforced’ peace.
The politics of Manipur perhaps constitutes one of the biggest challenges in the Naga peace process. The Nagas in the state under the leadership of United Naga Council (UNC) has reiterated the demand for an ‘Alternative Arrangement’ within the state. Notwithstanding the hint that this AA will not violate the territorial integrity of the state, many in the valley are nervous and apprehensive about its outcome. The hill-valley divide is all too deep-rooted for anyone to overlook. The recent incident involving the molestation and assault of a Meitei actress by an NSCN(IM) leader and the reactions thereof exposed the ugly truth of social cleavage; of the bitter hostility between communities. To some extent, this seemed inevitable. The Meiteis constitute forty out of the sixty Assembly seats, and occupy disproportionate share in education and employment – the two key areas of hill tribes’ contestation. Respecting the Nagas desire to be governed under a common political arrangement would amount to cutting through state boundaries. Such claims based on ‘unique history of the Nagas’ for safeguarding their culture and traditions appears to be held back for reasons of political and economic expediency. Nagas in Nagaland seems to be less willing to share their resources, employment and educational opportunities to their brethrens from Manipur or Assam. It is in the backdrop of this realization perhaps that the Naga leadership in Manipur has demanded AA.
The bottom line is that, Nagas wherever they are, deserves, like any other communities, development of infrastructure and state services like roads, transport facilities, schools, etc, and protection of their cultural and traditional rights.
Including the lesser ‘Others’
In this regard, the internal politics of Manipur then seems to be an inescapable factor. However, the proposed AA solution leaves some questions unanswered. There are non-Naga tribes -Kukis, Paites, Hmars and others in the state. Certainly, they have an important role in the state politics with nine MLAs out of the twenty tribal MLAs of the state and occupying a sizeable and strategic area. The various movements from these non-Naga tribes are under Suspension of Operation (SoO) with the government and conducting political talks under the two umbrella organizations of United People’s Front (UPF) and Kuki National Organization (KNO). Interestingly, they have claims over the same group of people, the same territories and cultural space resulting in overlapping and sometimes almost exact territorial maps being presented as a part of their respective movements.
There are times when solution comes from the most unlikely of sources. The Zomi Council (ZC) has suggested a rather creative possibility: that of an Autonomous Tribal State(ATS) under Article 244A of the Indian Constitution. This calls for the creation of a separate Assembly for the hill districts of Manipur and administrative setup amongst other provisions. According to the memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister by the Zomi Council on 26th March 2011, the ATS will comprise of all the hill districts in the state with an objective to “fulfill the socio-economic, linguistic, cultural and developmental aspirations of the people; preserve the indigenous identity and rich traditional practices; protect their rights over land and its resources; and maintain the territorial integrity as well as security of the state and the nation.”
Such novel arrangement if accepted by concerned parties can pave way for a more peaceful future. It is premised on an idea of identity that is not rooted in merely linguistic or particular tribal lineage. It seeks to include and recognize the shared experiences of being a tribal from Manipur as the base for the ATS. This ‘shared experience’ is a product of long years of interaction with the valley Meiteis, albeit in multitude ways and degrees. Also, it does not challenge the existing territorial boundaries of the state. A development in this regard will, to some extent, answer the main grounds on which the Nagas and non-Naga tribals in Manipur sustain their political and militant movements: development with protection of cultural and traditional rights.
This demand for ATS appears to be more pragmatic that of AA. Manipur’s tribals have been denied their constitutional right to govern themselves as per Sixth Schedule. Their experiments with Autonomous District Councils (ADCs) and Hill Areas Committee (HAC) has been found unsatisfactory with no real powers conferred on them. AA seeks an answer only for the Nagas. An Autonomous Tribal State will be a significant step towards reclaiming Manipur, unless the government comes up with an alternative which is acceptable to the tribals. It has the possibility of solving many of the demands of the Nagas not necessarily on the condition of pan-Naga political unity. It can play an important role in the ongoing peace talks by meeting their demands without conceding the boundary of Manipur-a non-zero sum game. It also has the potential to set an example to numerous other movements in the region, in the way we construct and idealise our communities, cultures and politics- that there are possibilities of thinking beyond the existing categories, that a largely mono-lingual, mono-culture, mono-history is a necessary precondition to create peaceful societies.
The present mechanism of quelling protest rallies and economic blockages on an ad-hoc basis will only hamper the peace, development and interests of the state. Unfortunately, the divide between the hill and valley groups in Manipur has been deeply entrenched. Any plan for a solution requires political prudence, something neither the state government nor the local leaders are ready to engage in. A ‘state within a state’ for Manipur tribals can offer some respite but only if the leaders are willing to think beyond their immediate constraints.
(The writer is Lecturer in Political Science, St Joseph’s College, Bangalore)