Meghalaya at 52
By Our Reporter
SHILLONG, Jan 20: As Meghalaya marks 52 years of its existence, it grapples with the complexities of development, striking a delicate balance between progress and preservation.
In its early years, the demand for a hill state in the Northeast led to creation of Meghalaya. However, the focus on Khasi-Jaintia and Garo Hills, already equipped with autonomous councils under the Sixth Schedule, paved the way for the emergence of the All Party Hill Leaders Conference as the spearhead of the hill state movement.
MPR Lyngdoh, former principal of Shillong College and a renowned social activist, reflects on the state’s 52-year journey. Despite advancements, she emphasizes the perpetual scope for improvement. The educational landscape has evolved, with institutions like the National Law University, Indian Institute of Management (IIM), and North-Eastern Hill University (NEHU) contributing to Meghalaya’s growth.
Examining the alignment of Meghalaya’s trajectory with the aspirations of its people, Omarlin Kyndiah, general secretary of Sein Raij Niamtre, underscores a desire for a distinctive voice in administration. The historical significance of the Sixth Schedule, intended to provide tribal communities with cost-effective self-administration, raises questions about Meghalaya’s progress in managing its affairs.
He said, “Historically speaking, the concept of the Sixth Schedule is important for it attempts at providing the tribal people with a simple and inexpensive administration of their own, so that we could safeguard our customs, traditions and culture. Hence the Bordoloi Subcommittee in its report underscored the necessity for a separate model of administration for the tribals. How far have we progressed in managing our own affairs? The idea of independent status now appears to be “part of the problem and not the solution”.”
Renowned writer, Bijoya Sawian cautioned against viewing Meghalaya’s diverse milieu through a simplistic lens. While a shared aspiration for independent development exists, she highlights the inherent challenges of isolation, emphasizing that no society thrives in seclusion.
Pointing to xenophobia and the reluctance to embrace outsiders, rooted in historical “Divide and Rule” strategies adopted by the British, she attributed the reasons that have resulted in slow progress.
She added, “Forever, the hill people will always be wary of the plainsmen. Let this knowledge be the power to overcome this malady. One can always turn things around.”
She further mentioned, “The other reason is the conflict among the Meghalayans themselves especially the Khasis and Jaintias, based on religion and culture. This is inevitable but is too big a topic to discuss here. It is imperative to leave religion and politics out of the way if you want the state to develop. They are the biggest roadblocks in our journey towards progress, the biggest hurdles and highly avoidable because they form the root of a conflict that is debilitating both mentally and physically.”
Lyngdoh, reminiscing about a greener Laitumkhrah and the crystal-clear waters of Wah Umkhrah, expressed her concern about the changing environment. The encroachment of concrete structures is transforming Meghalaya’s landscape but eroding its natural essence, she lamented.
Kyndiah echoing these concerns, attributed the consequences of industrialisation and unscientific mining to deforestation, water scarcity, pollution, declining soil fertility, and increased wasteland. He was of the opinion that the symbiotic relationship between forests and tribals faces serious threats, endangering self-support food security systems.
The diminishing green cover resonates as a common concern among activists and residents. Sawian, drawing from Radhon Sing Kharwanlang’s work, emphasised the futile pursuit of wealth without truth and integrity and painted a grim picture of the changing landscape, with hills covered in concrete jungles and the fragrance of pine forests from her childhood replaced by aesthetic illiteracy and visual pollution.
Highlighting the integral role of conservation in Meghalaya’s culture, Sawian advocated for the respectful reintroduction of traditional knowledge.
On a similar note, veteran politician Bindo M Lanong also called upon all the regional party leaders to come together to work towards the interest of the people of the state, and give a befitting reply to the national parties which have been ruling the state for the last 52 years.
He sounded optimistic that the state had a bright future.
Conclusively, social activist Michael Syiem emphasised the foundational elements crucial for every state’s development. Basic infrastructure, education linked to human resource development, health tied to potable drinking water, all-weather roads, and responsive, accountable governance form the pillars of progress, he observed.
As Meghalaya treads through its 52nd year, the state grapples with the dual challenge of advancing economically while safeguarding its unique cultural and environmental heritage. However, citizens seem to remain buoyant about the bright future of the state hoping that leaders and people will emerge to transform the ideal Meghalayan vision into reality.