In a truly democratic and just society, decisions are not just simply made with the active participation; they are made in response to the people’s collective need and for the betterment of the society at large. Unfortunately, just a deeper look into the prevailing trend in Naga policy making, will indicate that decisions are only being made by those ruling, and of course in their interest as well. There is a nagging feeling that decisions being made are pro-rich and anti-poor. The visible cleft in Naga society is the straining relation between those with economic power and those without; and for a people that prides of an egalitarian history, nothing could be more tragic than this.
Take for instance, the roads. Though the state of Nagaland has the highest ratio of vehicles, it is a matter of fact, that majority of the people are without vehicles. Yet, the roads are not pedestrian-friendly at all. Kohima is an example in case. With the growing population of people, as well as increase of vehicles, there is a constant ongoing struggle for space on the roads; often making it unsafe for pedestrians. Would it not be wise to construct a secure walking path? Is it not in the interest and safety of those without vehicles, after all they are the majority, is it not?
In the name of beautification, town authorities have introduced laws that have implication on street vendors. While the efforts toward addressing such issues are worthwhile, it would be erroneous if alternative adequate measures are not provided for them to continue conducting their business in a manner that is permissible by the concerned authorities. The practice of just identifying problems and acting on them without providing alternative remedies undermines its integrity and legitimacy.
Inspite of an uncertain political future, the ongoing uni-lateral and bi-lateral ceasefires between Government of India and Naga political organizations over the years have changed the face of Naga society. Internal and external business investors have seized this opportunity to take risks in initiating new business ventures. While it is much appreciated and needed, yet, the direction it has taken is raising quite a bit of concern. It would be a matter of political positioning and perspective as to define what the priorities of the Naga people ought to be.
Yet, it is a matter of fact that the question of poverty must be addressed and though the issue of reconstruction is a little premature, it is of utmost importance to take steps towards this end at every given opportunity. This period of ceasefires has been a good opportunity to address both poverty and reconstruction at varying levels. However, when one looks back over the years, it seems like it is an opportunity missed. Rather than try to understand and begin addressing the roots of poverty and the questions unfolding around reconstruction, these issues were just swept under the carpet as if they did not exist.
It would be fair to say that Nagas as a whole have failed to utilize this period of ceasefires to engage with some of the profound social issues. Instead the response has been reactive, and people have gone into a frenzy of stockpiling and filling up their pockets, just as if they are preparing for another storm. This social behavior itself is negative and defensive in stance on the assumption that stockpiling resources is the priority. It is not a forward looking behavior. It implies that there will be another storm. From this point of view, the direction in which Nagas are moving is indeed anti-poor and pro-rich.Unless this trend is addressed with, the cleft between the haves and have-nots would become the most difficult issue for Nagas in our time.
