Integrating poles? Kintsugi?

Wangam Akash Rajkumar *

Kintsugi is the Japanese art of putting broken pottery pieces back together with gold — built on the idea that in embracing flaws and imperfections, you can create an even stronger, more beautiful piece of art.

The present political scenario reflects two distinct aspirations from the two engaged ethnic communities. Demands, pleas and allegations have been made against each other in print and electronic media.

The animosity between the two has been ever increasing in both paper and action. Any avid observer of the scenario can see some contrasting philosophical and material desires. Moreover, on a closer look, it presents a kaleidoscopic environment. Rotation of the cell in a kaleidoscope causes motion of the materials, resulting in an ever-changing view being presented.

Likewise, every claim of being sane and non-violent, of peaceful co-existence by one group that were made in the last 90 and more days in media house panel discussions, analysis, interviews is challenged by the opposing group. So much so that the opposing group alleged that it is the exact opposite of what is being ‘claimed’. It is in this light, we can see two contrasting, divergent aspirations.

One of the groups ( *group refers and indicates the pool of civil society organisation(s), student body(s), military outfit(s) whichever is/are applicable in any given context) represents the Kuki-Zo communities collective interest.

The Kuki-bodies have alleged the state machinery of certain misdeeds- like the order from the High Court of Manipur regarding the Scheduled Tribe status of the Meitei/Meetei community, the execution of reserve forest areas as main fueling agents of their grievances.

These allegations have been the backbone to build and stack up their demands. From separate administration to Union Territory status; from Kukiland to Greater Mizoram, the intention is very clear. The idea of territorial integrity, unity seems to have lost its significance. The notion that the state machinery has oppressed them of their rights in the state fuels their desire for separation; with a hope that Greater Mizoram would be an ideal place. All these could have been settled peacefully through legislative or judicial processes.

Nevertheless, the underlying politics of narco-terrorism that runs beneath the demand for a rightful claim of citizenship has shown their true characters. A simple analogy would be the display of arms, openly, at a peace rally and scale of violence; however hard it be denied, the truth stands. The concerned had hastily ignored the possibility of a democratic solution. In short, these groups expel themselves from the other group.

It tries to escape from any integrating factor through any means. This is made very much familiar from all the press statements that were made in the past few months. Any idea of integrity is dropped willingly or unwillingly. The rotating cell of the kaleidoscope here the ever-increasing demands they had stacked up on every opportunity.

These groups have openly condemned the actions of the Meiteis/Meeteis as barbaric and inhumane. They have alleged the Meiteis/Meeteis of unethical behaviours. They have portrayed themselves to be the, only, victim in this political conflict. Nonetheless, it is hard to ignore the open support they had received from armed groups.

All the while, there arises a question on the legitimacy of the weapons and the armoury they had flashed in their social media accounts like Facebook. Here lies an interesting rotating cell of the kaleidoscope. The tweets they had made call for help from every possible resource. However, at the same time, it cannot be denied that they had not committed any act of crime during the said period.

They had built a self-image of high moral character. If so then, who is to be alleged for the continued destruction and burning of houses, when the issue could have been reached for a diplomatic settlement; or the continuing desecration of Meiteis/Meeteis temples in the areas controlled by them?

The Meiteis/Meeteis condemned the actions carried out by the Kuki militants as barbaric. Certain videos have surfaced in the social media where unarmed individuals were tortured inhumanely before being killed. The individual is mutilated alive. Those instances show slow and painful deaths. These actions never justify their demand for separatism.

The other group, chiefly, represents the Meitei/Meetei community. Despite their composition, they have a broad outlook towards territorial integrity and unity. Through this outlook, they claim to represent the collective interest of Manipur as a whole. At present, affiliation from groups of other communities is feeble. Nevertheless, this shortcoming does not hinder them in appealing for a united Manipur.

Here, the kaleidoscope lies in the conflict of interest amongst the different groups. Despite the constitution of a co-ordinating body the voices raised come from different sources. The body had led the people for the past few years. The body channels collective decisions for the people. The problem lies in the form of uncoordinated activities that are being taken up in line with the decision.

And, it happens to be tagged as ‘leirak ama sheishak ama’. A unified co-ordinated mass action remains a dream. It is high time to realise that “When a leader does not address the problem, the problem becomes the leader. And the leader becomes the problem.” To revoke from this cynical gyre is an achievement of any society.

The democratic groups deny the affiliation of certain radical groups that had sprang up recently. The democratic groups do not acknowledge the actions of the radical groups openly. The radical elements had a certain ideology of saving the Meiteis/Meeteis community from demographic threats, economic imbalance, and especially the previously Meiteis/Meeteis settled area in the surrounding hills of the state.

So, as in order to achieve their desired goal(s), they resort to certain radical elements when demanded. Another aspect is the role of local clubs and Meira Paibis. The role played by these institutions in their respective fields cannot be easily dislodge and negated. The contribution of them in the recently held peace rally stands for itself.

However, the scenario calls for more serious collective and co-ordinated actions. In case of road blockage and checking, the coordination seems to be feeble, and in few cases negligible. A sudden surge or a sudden gathering cannot sustain a planned movement. Strategies, planning and most importantly execution of the planning orderly is not an easy task.

Yet it had to be carried out if the desired goals were to be achieved. It will be shameful if the scenario creates unnecessary misunderstanding amongst the Meitieis/Meeteis. Good representation from each institution whenever opportunities arise is necessary. The spokesperson needs to have a good understanding of the present scenario.

To an extent, in the words of a reputed scholar, the Meitieis/Meeteis tend to be more reactionary. Scenario as present is a good example that the common Meiteis/Meeteis have failed to realise the issue when it was developing. As they believed in peaceful co-existence, the signs might have been ignored knowingly or unknowingly.

It is high time to educate the people on such social issues and the counter measures that can be taken up. The reactionary measure cannot sustain long goal oriented mass movements. This is another feature of the kaleidoscope Meiteis/Meeteis community needs to look into.

Another feature in this kaleidoscopic environment is the present role of media in presenting the events. The national media while trying to uncover the truth through ground reports seem to favour the tribes. They raised more concern on the well-being of the tribes. The reports construct a myriad of images of the scenarios, which may mislead the scenarios.

To put in simple language, both the sides have been suffering and it will be better if the media stands not to incite further violence through their reports. Further, the neutral communities can also volunteer themselves to bring peace.

Although the scenario is an ideal one to wait for political opportunities, the net gain opportunity may be far out weighted by the net loss. Losing the territorial integrity is putting an end to a long history of the state. As a whole, the bird’s eye view presents a very different picture from the ground reality.

While the groups stand for their goals, the common masses have to endure the pain and sufferings. It will be better if the stakeholders come out to negotiate without affecting the territorial integrity of the state.

This points to the question that can the two poles be integrated? If so, will it be a Kintsugi? If it happens to be a Kintsugi, a bright future awaits the state. Or should the two poles stay apart??Or are the problems becoming the leader?? Is the scenario driven by the force of the problem and not towards the solution by respective leaders??