Sino-India's Relation: Impact on North Eastern India (1947 to 2011)
- Part 3 -

Sanabam Gunajit Mangang *

Impacts of Sino-India's relation to Manipur in sphere of culture, political and economic on phase wise.

1947-62

a. Cultural Impact: The process of India's nation building gain its momentum in high pace at Manipur and later on the educated youth feel to be deceived by the Government of India. The Manipuri slowly and slowly began to identify as racially different from the rest of India ultimately leading to the demand of restoration of the lost identity.

b. Economical Impact: Least development of the North Eastern India and particularly Manipur as much as possible from centre/New Delhi view or kept in landlocked.

c. Political Impact: Armed Forces Special Power Act 1958 was impose at entire North Eastern India. People struggle for greater involvement in administration and local focuses on development in which the centre completely neglected. Aspiration for Self rule and restoration of past glory gain momentum.

1963-90

a. Cultural Impact: Anti India feeling after the series statement and action which literarily shows the negligence towards NEI after 1962 war. Intellectual circle of Manipur for reviving of the Irabot vision of Pan Mongoloid ethos and revivalism of old tradition. Anti Sanskritisation was also on the same pace and gun culture has engulf the entire region.

b. Economical Impact: Curb the trade practices between NEI and the neighbouring countries and borders were seal. Completely dependent on centre mercy, once prosperous and self reliance lost its glories and categorize as special category state which solely depend on central fund.

c. Political impact: Once State was a Kingdom now it had become part c State then Union Territory at last State of Indian Union. Movement for greater control along armed movement combine with pull apart political process. Student's movement which is political in nature without align to any of political parties and apparently the leaders of student body either form armed group or join them.

1991-97

a. Cultural Impact: Ethnocentrism elements were the main basis for any move in the state and tend to spread at the neighbouring states. Religious frenzy with the goal to change the Bengali norms that had imposed by the Hindu king of Manipur and had been in practice since 17th century. Fear factor of Mayang/mainland Indian replacing of the indigenous people with the ethnic extinction trauma was prevail strongly in this phase.

b. Economical Impact: Narcotic item smuggling became the main source of income for everyone civilian, politician, security personnel, and insurgent. There was a complete neglect on infrastructure development from the government side. Gap of rich and poor increases manifold leading to increase in crime and pathetic economic condition.

c. Political impact: Armed Non State Actor/insurgent power projection to each and every nook and corner of the state is the witness of this period. Three governance systems or parallel governance existed one by Non State Armed Group/insurgent, other Indian Security and another Central and State Government. On the other perspective the state has been fully militarize. The political scenario has not in normal atmosphere the power or authority to administer was distributed to the armed groups/insurgency, Indian security (army, paramilitary, police under AFSPA) and state government with loose control by the centre.

1998-2011

a. Cultural Impact: Gun culture and bomb fashion were hovering and had penetrated very deeply to the society that anything began to be resolve through this either by government agencies or other stakeholders to the conflict. Division into ethnic line, language line, and division amidst division of Manipuri India Vs Pan Mongoloid Manipuri is the factor that make conducive and confuse state of affairs. Mongoloid Cultural ethos and Indian identification is the point which the present generation debate over and which is also going to be a deciding factor for future generation.

b. Economical Impact: Focuses on the Development of Manipur ranging from infrastructure, human resources to the international trade/border trade. By the government of India propose better Connectivity through 'Trans Asian Train Network' and Asian Highway 1 with the Southeast Asian via Northeast India in which Manipur is the connecting point there is possibility of new waves of economic activities. Yet there are chances of Manipur being merely a transit point without much involvement of the locals in the activities resulting out from the tri relation of Government of India, China, and Insurgent.

c. Political impact: Anti Armed Forces Special Power Acts movement began to internationalize force to withdraw the army occupation of Holy place Kangla and repeal of AFSPA from some areas of Imphal. More participation on election process and the overwhelming influence of national parties and decline of regional parties which is contrary to the rest of India. Shifting of the arm confrontation engagement pattern in which the Indian security agency began to involve much on administration. Several insurgent faction turns up for Suspension of Operation; it may assume that a process for peace has initiated yet there is a long way to go for the main and major groups are on large.

(The impacts table is construct on the basis of firsthand experience, references books, Field Work, questionnaire and advices from the experts and stakeholders to the conflicts)

In the present context if we look to the Northeast it seems to be nearer to China then India over here the question is whether India is on the verse of loosing North Eastern India while engaging China or is it really loose.

LOOK EAST POLICY AND PROSPECT OF CULTURAL SHIFT

The India's promising 'Look East Policy' became its driving foreign policy and engagement with the other nations. It is an economic oriented in initial later covers the area of geo-political, security, terrorism, and Asian integration. With the evolution of LEP from economic to better engagement with the South East Asian and extending up to Pacific and East Asian compel to open multi front door. Trade under LEP at sea and air is not enough thus the land route too became one of the important gateways for its growing trade volume. Northeast being the Connecting point of East Asia, South Asia and Southeast Asia through land the focus of developing the region infrastructure became vital.

The realist has mischaracterized India's LEP as direct response to increasing Chinese presence and it is a long term trend evolves out of Non-Alignment this was the belief of some of scholars. But the proxy war that has begun with the Tibetan refugee, human right crisis, North Eastern insurgencies and counter allies has sows the seed of unique cultural pattern to the India's North Eastern Region and China domestic policy. It may not be wise to said that the North Eastern India is the theatre of India- China proxy war but the facts available clearly indicate how deeply it has been rooted. The Chinese soil had been use by the Manipur Insurgency for ideological, logistic, combat, arms and tactical training in this whether the China's ruling authority has knowledge of it or not is still vague.

Looking from this version with the coming of India Look East Policy there can be two possibilities; either North East insurgent may increase its strength and influence in manifold or the development of the region reach in such a position giving a hope and strength towards prosperity. Since 1991 to 2003 the India's Look East Policy did not involve the NEI and region was out of its purview. With the initiation of BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation) and (MGC) Mekong Ganga Cooperation as a part of India's LEP has broadened the India's engagement with its neighbour.

And as the second phase of LEP which began in 2003 covers from Australia to East Asia with ASEAN as its core. This marks a shift in focus from trade to wider economic and security cooperation, political partnerships, physical connectivity through road and rail links . Gradually the NE region became vital for the India's engagement with other nations.

On this virtue New Delhi suddenly turns up with huge infrastructure development along with the propose Asian Highway, Trans Asian Rail Link and inland water connectivity to the region. This gave a jolt at the region and people and appears the apprehension and curiosity to the people of what next. Dilemma of New Delhi to invest and develop the region or not and distrust by the people of region on its frame work which claim to be people to people contact but in practice people of the region seems to be out of the picture may proof to be another point of anti national by the local.

India's engaging China from the prism of Look East Policy will cost dearly to the region for the dichotomy perspective of local, mainland Indian, centre, state, military, and insurgent. And further this may proof worsening in both the Sino-India relation and the region-centre relation. The policy itself had begun by 1991 LEP yet there is no sign of people involvement and no sign of industries development in the region till date.

Beside this the region being engulf in inferno of armed violence and governmental repressive act relatively resulted mass killing and armed related killing had identified as systematically persistent ethnic cleansing by the sections of the Manipuri people and the policy itself carries a hidden agendas and perspective towards the region. People of the region perceived that bleeding blood of small section for the betterment of larger is not fair and the best way will come if local were involve in process of engaging with the neighbor country under LEP. Supporting this view some of scholar had identified the advantages and complimentary area which can be helpful for better Sino-India's relation.

As some of the Indian academician and scholar identified the good prospect of 'Looking East' policy and can be a bridge to bring closer ties with China. They identified the advantage of connecting the NEI and South west of China as; strategic location, possibility for penetration of road ways water ways and railways, untapped and under utilize natural energy, vast reserve of natural resources, human resource, attached with 400 million strong market, versatile tourism market, linked Asian Highway and Trans Asian Rail Link.

And some of the area which complementarities to each other are; NEI has stable railways and waterways network and South West has stable roads ways and airways network and NEI bordering mainland India, Myanmar and Bangladesh and South West China bordering mainland China and some ASEAN members countries, NEI has a large pool of English speaking population and SWC has rising English speaking population, NEI develop IT software and SWC develop IT hardware and electronic equipment, NEI has underutilize capacity in construction and SWC huge potential demand for infrastructures and NEI presence of private capital while SWC has scope for private enterprises . Thus there has a good prospect and positive way for both countries to flourish side by side rather than competing and contesting each other for supremacy and power.

SUGGESTION

I. India (mainly academician and politician) need to come out of box of colonial legacy of China is threat to India's interest.

II. China need more focus on economic basis rather than power projection and soft power race.

III. Economic response rather than proxy war and prevent as much as possible of countering/indirect containing of each other.

IV. Shift of the approaches from militarization to concord.

V. Better and larger engagement at trade which had never hampered by any of tension.

VI. India to give up fault nation building theory and respect the spirit that India had been born.

VII. Engagement with the involvement of the people in border area of both for this people share common cultural ethos and social norms having been living each other relatives on both side.

VIII. Minimizing Proxy war an asset to normalcy



Concluded ...

This paper was presented at International Seminar on: Analyzing the rise of India and China Domestic, Regional and Global implication" organised by Warsaw University and Institute of foreign Policy Studies

REFERENCES

1. Phanjoubam Tarapot, 'Insurgency Movement in North Eastern India', Vikash Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. 1996, New Delhi.
2. Lt. Col. T. Hemo Singh, 'Manipur Imbroglio', Akansha Publishing House, 2009, New Delhi.
3. Jayanta Kumar and Prabir De, 'India and China in an Era of Globalization: Essay on Economy', Bookwell, 2005, Delhi.
4. Sri Ram Sharma, 'India-China Relations 1947-1971 Friendship goes with Power Part I', Discovery Publishing House, 1999, New Delhi.
5. Sri Ram Sharma, 'India-China Relations 1972-1999 Part II', Discovery Publishing House, 2003, New Delhi.
6. M.L. Sali, 'India China Border Dispute', APH Publishing Corporation, 1998, New Delhi.
7. M.L. Sali, 'India-China Relation', APH Publishing Corporation, 2009, New Delhi.
8. N.N. Bhatacharyya, 'Manipur Land, People and Economy', Rajesh Publication, 2006, New Delhi.
9. Li Li, 'Security Perception, and China-India Relations', KW Publishers Pvt Ltd, 2009, New Delhi.
10. Amardeep Athwal, 'China India Relation Contmporary Dynamics', Routledge Taylor and Francis Group, 2008, London and New York.
11. World Focus series 2008, 2009 and 2010,
12. Martin Jacques, 'When China Rules the World', Penguin Books Limited, 2012, London.
13. Dhanabir Laishram, North East in Benthic Zone, Manipur University Research Club, 2006.
14. Phoujabam Tarapot, Bleeding Manipur, Har-Anand Publications Pvt Ltd, New Delhi, 2005.
15. Hareshwar Goshwami, History of The People of Manipur, Kangla Publications, Imphal, 2004.
16. Naorem Sanajaoba, Manipur Treaties and Document, Mittal Publication, New Delhi, 1993.