It is ironic that the politics of promises, as well as the politics of forgetting are so comfortably intertwined in the Naga context
A common practice in politics is for elected officials and government servants to make promises that many times cannot be attained. The very words often represent nothing more than empty rhetoric, especially in relation to governments and political parties in the Nagaland state political scenario. Ironically, it is by making the issue-based promises that the political parties attempt to win the people’s confidence. Inevitably, it is the very same promises and assurances made by the same people and political parties that are broken time and time again by the many governments that have assumed political power.
The degree to which the State and its government deviates from their promises compromises democratic practices and values as it betrays a lack of sincerity, political will and commitment to truly serve the people they claim to represent.
Let us examine the citizen’s expectations after years of political struggle and living in an unhealthy environment where conditions are fluid and armed conflict is ever present. How does the habit of promises contradicting performance affect the Naga psyche, and what are its implications? Does it mean that once in power, politicians take the people for granted and the promises forgotten? Or, are the people fatigued and battle-worn that they become indifferent to the abuse of trust and the arrogance of political power?
Another perspective takes into account the fluid nature of social, political and economic conditions which may have been different at the time when promises were made. Nonetheless, central to the promises made is whether the politicians and parties’ actual intentions are honorable and honest; and whether they are willing to be held accountable for any lapses when arises.
If the government is people-driven and people-centered, then the people’s basic needs are to be upheld and addressed. After all there is nothing more important than safeguarding the lives of ordinary people and the environment in which they life. The public needs to ask whether the government and its workers – elected and appointed are upholding the public trust that ensures representative, participatory and inclusive democratic governance that are accountable to the people.
The politics of forgetting, or more specifically political amnesia, is a common trait amongst politicians and governments. It is ironic that the politics of promises, as well as the politics of forgetting are so comfortably intertwined in the Naga context. This implies the presence of a weak civil society that is unable to stand firmly on issues and demand greater accountability and participatory governance from successive governments. And at the core, it reveals a government that is not people centered and one that has become complacent by conditions that make corruption and the abuse of power seem normal.
Has the ordinary Naga become indifferent and been marginalized along the sidelines? Are politicians and government servants so caught up in themselves that they are immune to responding to the public?
Let’s be clear, present day politics in Nagaland State are appalling, corrupt and have institutionalized violence within the dominant State structures. This type of violence is hidden and invisible, but dramatically impacts the people and perpetuates unacceptable living conditions. This structural violence placed alongside the protracted armed conflict is threatening the moral and political future of the people.
The Naga public can no longer remain a spectator in this scenario and needs to critique the structural violence and recognize that true power lies with the people. The public needs to define and critically identify the form of healthy political environment and nurture leaders that would address the core issues and serve the greater common good of all.
This must begin with holding elected representatives and government officials accountable to the ideals of democratic governance.
