The exciting phase of Development Economics which started in the late 1980s is now about to enter a next phase. While the core contents of development and measurement of it have been more or less settled, the issues of process and initiation are slowly but surely moving towards the centre.

In this process, the whole paradigm of Economics is also undergoing a dramatic change. In it we usually talk of faceless individuals and the interaction of individuals. It is exactly this citadel which is under threat from the ongoing and oncoming advances of Development Economics.

Ongoing Exploration

In the ongoing search for the final determinant of development and unified explanation of its process, economists are now finding that the assumption of faceless individual is wrong.

Every individual has an identity, and this identity has meaning only in a group (ethnic or otherwise). It is also being found that nationalism (not in the civic sense of, e.g., Indianness or Americanness , but in the cultural sense of Mexicanness or Manipuriness) just refuses to disappear from the scene.

This is where Development Economics is now seriously trying to bring nationalism into development analysis, while at the same time replacing the age old paradigm of faceless individual by an individual in a cultural group.

This is Where

It is at this point that I want to look at the prevailing scenario of Manipur's contemporary malaise. My point of departure is the present scenario of any group indulging in violence, destruction of public properties and threat for secession from Manipur territorially or institutionally on any issue.

These cannot be causes, but can only symptoms of a disease long untreated. What is incumbent on our part is to search for the causes.

While searching for the causes, I would take up four issues or rather four failures – two of the Government of India, and two of the State Government (a la fifty-fifty).

The areas are Sports, the hated 1958 legislation, the Imphal-centric approach, and the non-administration by the State Government.

Sports

Two contrasting news came forth recently regarding sports. One was the wonderful achievements of Mary Kom and Sarita, and another was the dropping of a sports item from representation in the forthcoming Asian Games. Let me bring in my nationalism here.

One greatest weakness of Indian development approach which the Centre now probably endeavours to rectify is the attempt to subsume under one macro-economic problem the diversity of development challenges being faced in different parts of the country.

Diversity is quite often the one being compromised at the policy altar, particularly so when the diversity happens to be of civic-politically inconsequential communities.

The recent dropping of a sports item wherein the Manipuri representation is significant is not the first of its kind when it comes to the sports of Manipur. Being a diverse country, India should first of all accept the fact that different communities constituting this richly-diverse country might be having differing talents in varied fields.

It would be uncannily presumptuous if we expect all the Indians to be playing either hockey of cricket. It is the mandated duty of the government of India to support the diverse talents for nurturing and preserving the civic Indian nation.

Besides this civic compulsion, adopting such a decision of non-sponsoring at this juncture is a politically incorrect decision. Sports should be utilised for union and not for divorce.

Further, Manipur has recently produced two great women sports-persons, Kunjarani and Mary. Kunjarani is already one of the all-time great hundred of women sportspersons, and Mary has pioneered in setting a global record.

Here too the overall response of the civic authorities of India is rather painful. Whereas Prakash Padukone or Indian Cricket (no need to mention hockey) is just one season flashes, these two have been consistent performers.

While Sania Mirza gets into the ranking (mind you within the first 100), she is found to be fit to become a subject for a chapter in the curricula of the National Council of Educational Research and Training. Kunjarani and Mary can wait!

1958 Legislation

I would not take the name of the legislation because the central as well as provincial administration seems to have established a ground rule to label as either an insurgent or a supporter of insurgent anybody who mentions it.

I would consider this legislation as one of the main factors for the recent ethnicisation of the Manipuri community.

Here I would like to recall the common story about cholera break out till the second quarter of the last century and being told to us by our parents and also teachers in the schools. If there were any break out of the disease in the neighbouring village, the villagers would pray that it does not come over to their village.

If it reaches the village, they would pray for sparing the leikai and so on till it reduces to the self. This legislation has become like the cholera and has confined the psyche of the populace to protection of smaller groups as to permanently leave a scar on the larger familial community called Manipuri.

Imphal-Centric

The recent outbreak of violent dissatisfactions against the State Government and ultimately against Manipur being seen all over the non-central valley areas is understandable and justified.

While we might blame Delhi for ignoring needed developmental interventions and looking at the State only from the so-called security perspective, we must equally blame the State administration for neglecting the regional realities. The State Government has too long been Imphal-centric in its approach.

I would rather have improvement of the Ukhrul-Phadang road or Tadubi-Tungjoy-Lai or Chakpi Karong-Mombi-Joupi than the fly-over in Imphal.

I would rather have an institute of technology wonderfully rich in environmental studies somewhere in Chandel, Tamenglong, Churachandpur or Ukhrul than in Manipur University campus.

Non-Administration

What Imphal does today, the other districts would follow tomorrow. The present trend of destroying properties has its roots in the early 1990s.

It was during this period that groups of people would take law into their hands and "punish" people with shaving off their heads or dismantling their houses. Unfortunately this was preceded and accompanied by a wrongful police administration of the then Imphal district.

The then district police administration was headed by a very flamboyant officer who established a culture of maintaining order by his diktats rather than by a system. He would make company with the groups taking law into their hands instead of establishing an order based on the rule of law. Well we now pay the price of snow-balling effect throughout the State.

Our Responsibility

Well, despite the failure of the Centre and the incompetencies of the State, the people just cannot afford to fail. Given the historical hurdles the people of the State had jointly passed through, I am afraid if the blood of any ethnic community is as kindred as each claims to be; it can only be a mingled one.

We have to behave true to the nature of our mingled blood and re-strengthen the common familial community we seem to be fast losing.

On the part of the State administration, it should handle issues of rule of law (I am not talking of insurgency related law and order) with a firm hand, and immediately stop its NGOisation of social issues; it cannot remain a silent spectator to the increasing erosion of state areas by private sector organisations.