Making Education a disturbance-free zone

By:- Sanatomba Kangujam *

The Debate : On Denial of Life or Education

The current movement spearheaded by the Apunba Lup has reached a highly critical stage following the class boycott campaign that the three students organisations viz AMSU, MSF and KSA have launched to press their demand for justice. It is critical in the sense that two other student organisations namely DESAM and ATSUM have unexpectedly initiated a countermove to re-open the educational institutions even as the Guardian Association made a fervent appeal to resolve the deadlock for resumption of normal classes at an earliest time-frame.

A debate has already been generated for and against the strategy of class boycott and closing down of educational institutions. The main argument forwarded by the protagonists of class boycott is, "Education is meaningless and worthless in the absence of right to life".

On the other hand, those who disfavour continuation of class boycott pointed out that it would be unacceptable to jeopardise the future career of students on account of the battle against the dumb and blind Government. This camp underscores the pressing need to make education a "free zone". They are not in favour of depriving the present generation of their right to education merely on political grounds.

Such raging debates may be construed as a sign of a fragmented society by the pessimists. But the enlightened intellectuals will certainly read it as a sign of a healthy social existence. Interaction of ideas takes place only in a progressive society. A society, characterised by high degree of regimentation, where there is no freedom of speech and expression can never proceed towards a higher stage of social development.

Differences of opinions have to be tolerated, at the same time, appreciate mechanisms to accommodate divergent views in a constructive way. Otherwise, a society cannot be called free and enlightened. But this does not mean that we should be insensitive to any possible eruption of ugly incidents that may arise in any unguarded moment.

Earnest efforts have to be made to prevent any retrogressive events from unfolding. Such a development would mean the doom of our society as a whole. Above all, utmost restraint needs to be exercised by all those who claim to represent the interests of the people.

Since our civil society organisations profess to represent the will of the masses, they ought to lend a patient ear to the voice of the people. If any such organisation is insensitive and intolerant to the opinions of the masses, we may ask them which sections of the society they are representing?

And who gave them the mandate to exist? Those who are working for the people should be mature enough to magnanimously withstand public criticisms and be receptive enough to accommodate public suggestions as well. If not, their credentials and legitimacy will be seriously questioned.

Class Boycott : Need for Homework

The class boycott campaign was launched by the three student organisations at a time when the agitation of the Apunba Lup began to die down following massive manhunt operations and imposition of frequent curfews by the State Government.

In such a situation, educational institutions became the most vulnerable targets for the agitators to drive home their demands and force the Government to yield. They find it much easier to close down the educational institutions than targeting Government offices which involves greater risk. However, they failed to take into account certain measures before launching the present movement.

The Apunba Lup should have consulted with other civil society organisations (including student bodies) of the Nagas, the Kukis, the Zomis, etc and reached certain understanding with them at the first place. We simply cannot initiate something on our own will and expect others to comply without obtaining their prior consent, no matter how justified our steps are.

Lack of coordination and consensus on any issue between the hills and the valley has done huge damage to our society. We have to remember that Manipur is not the land only of the Meeteis. It is also the land equally of the Nagas, the Kukis, the Zomis and of course the Meetei Pangals. Our leaders need to realise this reality before embarking on any line of action for justice.

Another significant factor contributing to the weakness of our movement has been the failure to mobilise local clubs, Meira paibi organisations and other civil society groups not affiliated with the Apunba Lup. Manipur is a land of numerous organisations. If the maximum strength of all these organisations can be channelised properly in the right direction, nothing would be impossible.

In the absence of such mobilisations, students are made to be at the receiving ends; especially so when the Apunba Lup and the State Government are embroiled in a long drawn out impasse. The argument put forward by the Apunba Lup, the JACs and the three student organisations are in fact justified but not enough.

Why should the brunt of fighting a repressive regime be borne only by the students? Is there no other option apart from shutting down the educational institutions? What about paralysing the entire administrative machineries? Or else, why not boycott all forms of elections held under the Constitution of India?

It is time the Apunba Lup search for other options if we have to overthrow this Government. The strategy of targeting the educational institutions is too weak and illustrative of the inherent limitations of the parties involved in initiating the present movement. This again demonstrates that our civil society organisations have not done enough homework for a sustained civil resistance.

Precisely on this account, some sections of the society have started to question their modus operandi. The unnecessary controversy surrounding the class boycott campaign could have been avoided had the Apunba Lup and others contemplated about the requisite strength to carry on the movement.

Under such circumstances, where mass participation is absent sic participation by local clubs, meira paibi organisations and others who are outside the purview of the Apunba Lup, it has become easy for the Government to single out the leaders and hunt them down.

Absence of a well-knit united platform, which may serve as the apex civil organisation, has been greatly responsible for constant ruptures and breakdown in our civil society movements. Our Meetei society is a highly fragmented one with multiple layers of consciousness that often finds manifestations in the existence of numerous centres of power competing for social and political space.

We need to overcome this reality if the Meeteis are to play a leading role in the construction of a modern Manipuri nationhood. We will not be in a position to convince and win over other communities if our house remains divided. First of all, we need to set things in right order. Then we can proceed towards a project of free and united Manipur.

Missing in Action : The Core Issue

Coming back to square one, I take the liberty to bare my opinions on the controversy besieging the current movement, with due respect to the Apunba Lup and the three powerful student organisations.

The murder of Sanjit and pregnant Rabina in broad daylight by the police commandoes is highly condemnable. Every step contemplated by the Apunba Lup and the three student organisations is understandable given the grim reality and the insensitiveness of the Government. But it will be more constructive if certain degree of liberty is permitted to every interested quarter to contribute something to the debate on class boycott. And I think it is quite permissible since the cause for which they are fighting is also for the people.

The main demand of the Apunba Lup is justice; justice not only for Sanjit, Rabina and her unborn child but also for all those who have been killed in staged encounters. And that justice lies in the removal of the incumbent Chief Minister and dismissal of all those police personnel involved in the murderous crime. This is called natural justice.

But the question is, will State terror come to an end once the demands are met? In my view, such presumptions would prove to be quite fictitious and utopian if we take into account the grim political reality that we have been encountering in our land. For example, Sanjit, Rabina and her unborn child are not the first victims and will not be the last to die at the hands of the State forces (or even call it collateral damage) in the ongoing armed conflict between India and Manipur.

Many CMs and DGPs will come and go and many movements may be launched. But the plight of the people (read civilians) will always remain the same until and unless the existing political conflict is brought to a logical end. This can be achieved either through complete extermination of the insurgent groups or the overthrow of the Indian rule or through sustained political dialogue between the two conflicting parties.

If that is going to be the case, does the present movement have anything to do with the said conflict or towards the resolution or transformation of the same? In other words, what is the core issue? The issue is neither the killing of Sanjit, Rabina and her unborn child nor the continued imposition of AFSPA and human rights violations.

The core issue is the existence of armed conflict between India and Manipur as I have clearly pointed out in my earlier write ups. Killing of Sanjit, Rabina and her unborn child has to be located within this context and any solution has to be sought accordingly. Since the context of the extra judicial killing was provided by the presence of an "insurgent" we cannot ignore insurgency any longer as a non-political issue. The persisting politico-military conflict and the July 23 incident are structurally linked which is why the two events cannot be viewed as separate and isolated occurrences. The context should not be overlooked while reading the text.

Against this background, it is pertinent to ask why does the Apunba Lup or for that matter any other group not address the core issue if they are really concerned about ushering in peace and normalcy in our society? The Apunba Lup failed to put up this issue during the Great July Movement of 2004. Majority of the leaders and urban elites remained contended when Shri Ibobi Singh revoked AFSPA from the seven constituencies of Imphal area while the periphery was made to languish under the colonial Act.

We thought Imphal was safe. Ironically even today, the Apunba Lup is not demanding the revocation of AFSPA from the entire territory of Manipur but merely demanding removal of the Chief Minister and his lieutenants within the framework of the Indian Constitution, to which many of the people owe allegiance! Besides, conspicuous silence of the Apunba Lup on issues relating to deployment of IRB and police commandoes in the Hills districts of Manipur speaks volume of its ambiguous political stand.

This can be summed up as sheer political short-sightedness. What I want to remind our leaders once again is that the valley alone does not make up Manipur and Imphal alone does not make up the valley. Conscious shortsightedness in terms of engendering urban and periphery as well as valley and hill dichotomies would prove to be suicidal for Manipur in the long run.

While emphasising upon removal of the Chief Minister and the guilty police personnel, what I observe is that the Apunba Lup has sidelined the core issue. Moreover, the core issue has been relegated to the background. This is the tragedy of "politics" in contemporary Manipur. It is like treating the symptoms rather than the disease. I simply wonder how long it will take to gather our strength and apprise the Government of India of the conflict situation prevailing in our land for the last three or four decades.

We have ignored the core issue for too long without realising that people are dying on account of the prevailing armed conflict. If we have to put an end to all these sufferings, we have to strive for a political solution by convincing the Government of India that there can never be a military solution to this conflict involving two nations.

So far, no audible voice has been raised from any quarters of concern to resolve or transform this protracted conflict. Shall we have to wait for more appropriate time or a more opportune moment to register our demand for early restoration of peace?

An Appeal in Lieu of Conclusion

I would like to appeal to the protagonists of the present movement to suspend the present campaign of class boycott and instead prepare to raise the core issue. When people's movement reaches certain stage, students will naturally come out of their classrooms and participate in the struggle. Until that time, leave the students alone and make education a "disturbance-free zone".

Let us not make the students the first casualty of armed conflict. A clarification is needed here. The slogan to make education a "free zone" is a misnomer because of its inherent negative implications. The term free zone is a laissez faire notion which connotes conferment of license to anyone who wishes to interfere in the sphere of education. Therefore, the more appropriate slogan should be, "Make Education a Disturbance-free Zone".

Lastly, I want to conclude by positing that it is too early to drag the students into the vortex of political controversies. Let us first do our homework well. Let us make education a disturbance-free zone and at the same time contemplate for a more intense mass civil resistance movement to bring about an early resolution to the political conflict between India and Manipur. This means addressing the core issue.