Framework for a Shared Future: A Way Forward on Democracy, Integration and Peace
- Part 2 -

Along Longkumer *

Framework for a Shared Future: A Way Forward on Democracy, Integration and Peace
(Text of the 11th Arambam Somorendra Memorial Lecture delivered on June 10 2016 at Lamyanba Shanglen)
By : Along Longkumer
Founder Editor, Morung Express

Noted anthropologist B K Roy Burman, has gone on to suggest the creation of an institution modelled on the Saami Council, similar to the case of the Saami people living in Sweden, Finland and Norway. Other writers in India have also commented on this 'non-territorial' approach to resolve the present demand of the Nagas for some kind of a common platform to administer them.

Within this broad imagination of a 'non-territorial' model includes talk of a 'Pan-Naga Hoho', Supra-State body and many more, including the disclosure by Padmanabhaiah of a possible Naga Regional Council.

Of course, till now no clarity exists on the specifics of how to evolve a system that works on the ground. The parties to the current negotiation, i.e., the Government of India and the NSCN (IM), I am sure would have studied the matter in-depth on the so called 'non-territorial model'.

Similar to the 'non-territorial model' is the idea that has evolved in Europe, of 'cross-border regions'. According to the Madrid Convention which provides a legal framework for its establishment in Europe, the basic purpose of 'cross-border regions' is to deepen and broaden integration through cross-border institution or cooperation without the need to redraw international or state boundaries.

The reasons for the attention given to cross-border cooperation in Europe should be seen in its historical background. Many centuries of wars havecreated Europe's present boundaries. In many parts of Europe political boundaries have created unnatural divisions in ethnic and cultural regions. TheNagas in India and Burma or the Kurds in the Middle-East are similar cases.

It is quite clear that the Naga case for unification of its contiguous lands for now will have to come through a similar innovation of a cross-border arrangement. The question now is if Nagas are willing to bargain for suchan eventuality, will the people in Assam, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh also come half way to support such a move to create a non-territorial model.

This is a way forward—on how a 'non-territorial' or even say 'cross-border regional' model can be worked out that best suits the present reality of the Nagas, their neighbours and the working of Indian federalism.

As a Naga commentator, you may question some of the arguments put forward. My intention is simply to encourage an informed dialogue and greater understanding on this particular issue so that some formulations can be worked out.

We have seen thus far that whether it is for the Meiteis or Nagas, the 'integration' question, which-ever way you would like to interpret it from, is an emotive issue and so it is all the more necessary that we treat this with outmost care and matured deliberation without disturbing peaceful coexistence. As I see it, if you bring in party politics or take extreme and exclusive positions then it will become very difficult to resolve this problem confronting us.

Can we therefore look at a 'middle-path' solution in the context of the Naga peace process? That is a question I put before you.

Is it possible that without disturbing existing State boundaries, a federal solution through a non-territorial approach can be worked out for the Nagas of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh in India and those eastern Nagas in Burma?

Having studied and analysed this complex and sensitive issue, my own opinion is that for now, the next best bargain for Nagas is to have some form of localized integration as defined under Article 244A along with perhaps the idea of a Special Administrative Region and one that does not disturb the existing State boundaries.

I am sure some formulations will have to be worked out. If we can do this, it will also lead to the larger goal of peace, unity and integration of the North East in general and Manipur-Nagaland in particular while allowing our people to coexist as neighbours.

Federalism and democracy - A relook at State systems

Another important point that I want to pick out from Dr Lokendra's speech that he made at the inauguration of the Naga Archives & Research Centre Dimapur on November 7, 2015, is the one where he has mentioned about Manipur as a "historically established entity" and how the "the issue of ethnic relations had become mired with issues of the modern state's inability to design a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-linguistic polity and community...."

Correct me if I am wrong but what I understand here is that the numerous challenges that Manipur is presently faced with, including the aspiration of various sections of people, will require an appropriate response that goes beyond the present constitutional arrangement. Without going into the specifics, the present state of affairs in Manipur I believe requires a 'tectonic shift' somewhere.

And as Dr Lokendra alluded to in his speech, the need to design a multi-ethnic polity "is demanded by the very nature of Manipur's geography and polity nursed since its ancient history and their emergence into the globalized world of today".

This for me is a fitting analysis of everything that is going on in Manipur. More importantly, it points to the need to explore and write new political alternatives.

To give the benefit of doubt, Manipur is perhaps one of the few States in India with both a multi-ethnic demography and geography and therefore poses its own challenge when it comes to governing the State. It is not surprising to witness so many upheavals taking place in Manipur, especially the increasing division and acrimony between the people in Manipur valley and the surrounding Hill tribes.

Having recently read about it, social scientists and researchers are probably right when they state that historical forces over the centuries, including British rule are also to be blamed for the unequal relation between the hill and the valley. As AK Ray in a research paper titled "Ethnicity: A Manipur Case" points out that "in the field of politics, administration, law and religion the hill people were kept apart from the rest".

Despite all these historical flaws that were inherited, I must also point out the observation made by Sir James Johnstone, political officer of Manipur for several years, who wrote about the "remarkable aptitude the Manipuris possess or have for dealing with the hill-tribes". It is said that the Burmese tried in vain to subdue the Tangkhuls. And as stated in Johnstone's book, in one case, a force of seven hundred men that were sent against them, were entirely destroyed. However, as the Manipuris advanced, the different tribes quietly submitted. There was peace and order.

Can we reclaim that era of peace and order?

Power, politics and aspirations all change with time and it is no exception to Manipur and the people who live here. But the fundamental thing that should not change is fraternity and to live in peaceful co-existence. This applies to the Meiteis, Kukis, Nagas. We need to restore that relationship—to live in peace and amity but perhaps in a new political arrangement.

And so coming back to the question of a political alternative—a way forward has to be found to end the vicious cycle of strife and unrest in Manipur.

To be continued.....