Witoubou Newmai
The high-octane declaration of hill-valley geniality by the N Biren Singh government has been once again greeted with much derision as the United Committee, Manipur (UCM) and the United Naga Council (UNC) consolidate their respective positions with concurrent events on October 31.
The UCM is organizing the rally “to reaffirm the collective stand on the integrity of Manipur.” The UCM has been saying time and again that the “protracted dialogue going on between the Government of India and the NSCN-IM has been threatening the integrity of Manipur, both politically and socially.”
On the other hand, apparently showing its opposition to the rally in Imphal, the UNC will be imposing a “total shut down” in the Naga areas under its jurisdiction on October 31. According to the UNC, the move is to “demand that the Indo-Naga peace talk finds a solution to the Naga political problem at the earliest.”
The plain message intended to convey here is that, all these divergent events planned respectively by the UCM and the UNC have brought down the gavel across the face of the tall claims of the hill-valley bonhomie by the Biren Singh government.
Such a development is also a reminder to all concerned parties that welfare schemes, no matter how hefty and attractive, never ensure a lasting solution and can only sedate the situations momentarily.
In this, we would like to remind that, unless bigger space is given for a soul-searching dialogue intervention, the Meitei-Naga cacophony will continue to inhibit all channels of advancement and progress. Such an atmosphere is eating into the vitals of future opportunity for communication.
The right thinking people, at this juncture, can no longer afford to remain idle in their reluctant chairs. This is the opportune moment for them to actively intervene and explore the way forward to break out of this vicious stalemate.
We need to note that the myriads of issues confronting the State of Manipur either persist or even get more complicated with time because certain involving groups are not willing to consider things as they are, but viewing them through their own interests. It reminds all of us of French-American thinker Anais Nin who aptly noted, “We don’t see things as they are; we see them as we are.”
Since damages have already been done to the relationships of communities in Manipur, initiatives for dialogue intervention will face difficult starts. Nevertheless, it is imperative to remind ourselves with Carl Bard’s, “Though no one can go back and make a brand new start, anyone can start from now and make a brand new ending.”
