
Achan Ramsan
The fulcrum of history rests on the quest for identity. Empires rise and fall with the people asserting the supremacy of their identity. Nations small or strong, big or bold, weak or worn, great or grand, they all are the creative expression of the people of that nation. Merging out of the yearning of the people, their consciousness gives form and their action gives shape to their aspiration. The force that gives ultimate shape to the destiny of one’s people is the response and responsibility of the entire people shaping such outcome of history.
Indeed, ingrained in the social psyche of all people is that tendency or inclination to give vent to their aspiration with pride to that nobler task of building a nation great. It is more of choices and efforts than chance. Nagas are no exception to this. In fact, they have tenuously and tirelessly worked towards self-determination of chalking out their own destiny with grit and determination in the face of the stiffest of opposition from within and without.
Surviving the might of the British Empire and the onslaught of the Indian army, theirs was an indomitable spirit of a marathon race, stubbornly fought that finally reached the pinnacle of the negotiating table with the government of India, long after the empire had set and the mantle of ruling them passed into the hands of a more difficult ruler. More admirable is their regenerating feat to resuscitate themselves from the suicidal demolition from within out of internal feuds, rivalries and coup.
From the inception of the Naga Club, to the NNC, to the Federal Government of Nagaland, to the NSCN, to the split into the NSCN (IM) and NSCN (K) along with various so-called accords and agreements, Nagas have come a long way. Out of the trails of such adverse circumstances, more maturity seem to have been gained and more opportunities opened in defining the destiny of the Nagas in term of public awareness, participation and involvement and international exposure.
Such a scenario was unthinkable in the 60s and the 70s when the public would not be as prepared as today to shoulder such an onerous task on the implication of their decision. Even today they are not very prepared to handle the outcome, even though they are ready to accept the responsibility of their decision.
This is evident in the opposition to the integration of their territories crisscrossed into many units with other states and communities. One gets the impression of the problems as either unforeseen or unexpected but this is something never out of the blue as they were very apparent some decades back, though initially the Meiteis did not object during the 60s. But times are a-changing and now the tiny size and manner of their habitation spread and confined in the narrow strip of the valley became the main occupation of their concern as the day goes by.
The spectacle of ethnic violence looms large in Manipur on the issue of Naga-territorial-integration. Just when the talks between the government of India and the Nagas seems poised for a major breakthrough to a final term of acceptable settlement in the recent talk, all that could turn the tide became the merger of all Naga areas.
In discord with any merger move of vital significance is the staunch and stern opposition of the Meiteis to the aspiration of the Nagas in Manipur to merge into one administrative umbrella called Nagalim. Following the declaration of the ceasefire in August 1, 1997 the Meitei frontal organizations organized many a massive rally in opposition to ceasefire extension in Manipur which was wrongly dubbed as participated by the Nagas despite the absence of any organizational representation. Wide publicity blitz characterizes such rallies but what is of more significance to the Nagas but eclipsed from media coverage is the mass exodus of the Nagas from Imphal in which thousands fled the valley that Nagas would rather vacate the valley than surrender their rights.
The efforts of the organizing committees to contain and control any untoward incident are laudable but that did not prevent the wave of derogatory remarks and threatening words from many quarters. But had there been any violence, the very purpose of the rally would have been utterly defeated. This exposes the tips of the iceberg of the undercurrent of differences taking communal hue. It appears the two communities are absolutely committed in their conviction, holding on to their guns and seem torpedoed for a showdown even to the extent of violence.
This is not to mention other hurdles with strife strewn all around from factional feuds to squabbles from hesitant neighbors harboring opposition and reservation to the Naga issue. But the vortex to which the great dream of Naga unification issue that has been drawn on a very controversial note that is likely to dictate the outcome of the talk seem to be the Manipur issue since no other state has given such stiff an opposition.
The personal interest and agenda as well as the very survival of the Meiteis seem interminably tied with the Nagas or to be more precise with the land of the Nagas in Manipur. To feel the pulse of the Meiteis one is persuaded to go to the height and extent to which they are ready to go. The Meitei ‘uprising’ of 18/6 opposing unification of the Nagas’ land of Manipur with their counterpart, in which mob violence burnt the state assembly house and engaged in other widespread violence, is a case in point.
This suggests a vicious circle of mindset difficult to reason. The question is would the same set of people and mindset take the people as hostage and keep the state of Manipur as ransom? After all, mob frenzy always lacks rationale behind the deluge of action. History bears witness to the trails of such orgy, vis-à-vis the French mob that set the guillotine.
Now the foremost question behind such dangerous destruction is, could violence directed against the vulnerable section of the Nagas be far behind as evident when two youths mauled a hapless Maring women mindlessly and mercilessly requiring hospitalization for the very fact that Nagas dare to assert their aspiration through economic blockade (though this writer did not approve the manner of the agitation, given the choice). The implication of the very act is nothing but communal vendetta having far-reaching consequences and wide ramification that could well spell disaster by virtue of the potential to whip up communal backlash. But God forbid such engagement of mindless violence devoid of any good for the future.
The French revolution has a lesson or two for both the Meitei and Naga community. What well began as assertion of the people rights and appeared as a disciplined lot to pursue legitimate aspiration turned to distortion of the very right for which the movement began, thereby defeating the very purpose. The movement spearheading the interest of the Meiteis through AMUCO, UCM, et al, to maintain the status quo of Manipur territory from the point of the British administration and subsequent statehood creation in 1971 could be well meaning but without the support and solidarity of the Nagas, it never is a reality. The blockade and counter blockades, rally and counter rallies imply nothing but division and discord. So long as this remains, the twain shall never meet!
What I mean is this: if the differences between the two communities become more and more pronounced as the day goes by as the emerging trend suggests, instead of welding themselves together to the extend of ignoring their differences through mutual consent, then there is no use. Territorial integrity should not be at the cost of denying and depriving justice, human dignity and equality. The slogan: “Let us remain together and fight one another”, is senseless. Another slogan: “Let us dwell together so that I can dictate you”, is ridiculous.
Drawing on these two premises, the question is why the two shall remain together. Just for the heck of it?! For any union there must be meaning and purpose behind it borne out of mutual consent, respect and interest. Otherwise discord prevails and conflicts of interest jeopardize social cohesion even to the extent of rocking and wrecking the boat, finally putting the lives of everyone at stake.
It appears the Nagas and the Meiteis see the world and history differently, interpret them differently and approach them differently so much so that their perspectives became incompatible. It is an irony that following the cease-fire agreement between the Indian government and the Nagas, pandemonium prevailed in the valley of Manipur fearing territorial disintegration, prompting the Meiteis to seek security in the embrace of the Indian constitution, even to the extend of demanding constitutional amendment to safeguard the territory of Manipur, notwithstanding the fact that many Meitei insurgents are demanding secession from India.
Not even one of them condemned such move, which in any secessionist parlance is nothing short of total surrender to India. This is highly damaging to the morale and image of the insurgents as outfits without any ideological stand. The overall interpretation is this: Total recapitulation and reenactment of the instrument of accession or merger agreement signed by their Maharajah Bodhachandra in 1949 in which Manipur surrendered and became part of India. A case of history repeating itself! The point is on what basis the Meitei insurgents are waging the war now, if they indirectly accepted the Indian Union or constitution by tacitly supporting the move made by the Meitei frontal organizations, since their insurgents don’t reject the embrace of the Indian Constitution either.
One gets the impression that they are wrangling within the bound of the Indian constitution to achieve their aspiration. But the Nagas realized that within the bound of the Indian Constitution, they would and could never get accommodation to their aspiration and justice would never be done to their quest for freedom to develop the pristine glory of their past social, cultural and political heritage and translate them into the future.
To the Nagas, the people come first. Where there are people, there are lands. The two are one unit of the same entity, inseparably linked. Unlike the difficulty of other community in defining their boundaries, which may wax and wane according to the fortune of their kings, the Nagas do not have such problem. The territory of the Nagas consists of a well-defined boundary with each and every village having their own land and landmarks.
Thus, where there are Nagas, there is land as clear as the sky is from the earth. So often, there ensued war when intrusion happened. The occupation of the Naga territory by both the British and the Indian forces have diluted and downplayed the importance, significance and the relevance of such historic ancestral landmarks, bringing in its wake the present imbroglio, which is, but a brainchild of their adventurism. It is unfortunate and a mockery of justice that someone who had never planted a grain of seed in the land of the Nagas would claim it as his own.
True, the Maharajah would extort taxes from some of the hills villages against their wishes and much to their chagrin. In this connection, occupation of the hills would be an incorrect term because no forces of the Maharajah were ever stationed in the Naga hill in the way of administration but military expeditions were carried out to extort taxes and exploit plunder. And efforts to extort taxes were with a threat to carry out punitive expedition for failure of compliance.
Caste and class system being very much prevalent in the Meitei society, the Hillman were very much looked down during those time. As such the present move of the Meitei for territorial integrity is seen as perpetuation of their hegemony tentacles through sanction of the Indian government. But this in no way legitimized the claim of the Meiteis that the hills belonged to them. For that matter would the land of the Meiteis became a part of England just because they were conquered by the British and paid tribute to them? Let us not forget that once the valley of the present state of Manipur was devastated by the Burmese and laid desolate for 7 years (1819-1825) and given shelter by the hill tribes.
The two different poles of fatal departure without any meeting ground between the two communities entailing drastic consequences seem to hinge on two different lines of thoughts -- of perception, approach and practice. The Meiteis advocate the irrevocability and inviolability of the state, and uphold the supremacy and sovereignty of the state without first considering the interest of the people.
This perhaps, explains why no frontal organizations of the hills were ever consulted on the territorial issue but instead staged a mass rally unilaterally just after the declaration of the ceasefire in 1997. However, to the Nagas the people take precedence for any issue pertaining to union and there could be no sovereignty of the state unless endorsed by the people themselves. After all, the consent of the Nagas was not exercised in the creation of the state of Manipur, therefore declaring the union of the state as illegitimate, null and void.
To the Nagas, the very creation and existence of the state of Manipur has been perceived as an instrument of suppression of their rights and insult to their dignity. A case in point is the various documents and memoranda submitted to the center for reverting back the tribal land into a union territory or listings in the 6th schedule through the All Tribal Students Union of Manipur (ATSUM). But it was said the Nagas kept the movement in abeyance after becoming hopeful of the positive outcome of the talk between the Indian government and the NSCN (IM).
The history of mankind is the struggle against oppression and suppression, subjugation and exploitation of one group of people by another. The rise and fall of a nation is dictated by the assertion of the peoples’ rights to secure social justice and equality in exercise of one’s conscience in pursuit of his/her aspiration. No force on earth is strong enough to bind and suppress the dynamic force of such pursuit of justice forever, because the unyielding spirit of man’s quest for freedom when sustained by justice defies all boundaries and barriers created by man.
Otherwise any movement not propelled by a strong and legitimate reason fades away in due course of time. Transcending linguistic differences, cultural barriers, bondage of tribalism and the trap of parochialism, the Nagas today have emerged from the cocoon of their narrow shell to gel into one great family within a well defined parameter of unity of meaning and purpose to weave that common dream of building a nation despite all their differences and despite the bitter rancour of the past smeared with blood.
Therefore a consensus union based on mutual benefit and interest, well qualified to live together as one people, ready to mend fences and end fights. This means recognizing and admitting the faults and wrongs in the way of reconciliation, which is to be followed up by amends, thereby paving the process of healing, so that the entire authority and the final freedom of choice is the sole discretion of the victim either to accept or to reject and part ways.
Otherwise forgiveness or friendship for that matter cannot be forced nor forged through a one liner. It takes a lifetime to interpret a word into action, a lifetime of devotion for trust to build up nurtured by the water of honesty and sincerity. The Nagas have long been victim of history be it in the hands of the Meitei, the Kukis, the British or the Indians. Naga villages today bears testimony to this and tell tales of the ruthless intrusion of their lands by such well organized overwhelming external forces beyond them to counter and who controlled their land for a considerable period of time in the form of exorbitant taxes and hostage of their women as ransom in a very desultory manner.
All this insult of dignity they have borne taking them as a short passing phase of alien life, but hoping against hope for a better world in which their way of life would find and gain legitimacy in the world and would be left alone without trying to adopt a new way of life in order to adapt to the situation. And all this for their fierce love of freedom and independence, allegiance to their village, clan and family alone, nothing more and nothing less, rejecting any sort of federation or union beyond the village and the village system. They have paid the price dearly for their stubborn act of isolation. Now today, should they not be given a chance to unite? Or is it too high a price to ask for?
The world has come of age to be fooled by any dominant group to rule and dictate over the lesser. The age for empire to shrink or swell based on social justice is here to stay. The integration of Germany, disintegration of USSR and independence of East Timor are a few instances. This indeed is social justice. And social justice only becomes a reality when the aspiration of the people is realized. Let the Naga people too decide their own destiny and give them a chance to shape their own future.