Beyond India's Political Border : Anchoring the Core Issue
- Part 1 -

By:- Sanatomba Kangujam *

Issues besieging Manipur at present seem to be exceedingly numerous with the general masses being left in a state of total confusion that borders on powerlessness. Of all the issues that we have been made to experience, the one involving the question of our very existence as a 'dignified self' definitely constitutes the most paramount issue.

The natural urge of man to maintain a 'dignified self' both at the collective and individual levels has been fiercely invaded from various quarters, particularly the Indian State. Events unfolding in the present political scenario of Manipur witness the application of coercive State machineries in their most dehumanising role in subjugating the 'dignified self'.

The callous act of eliminating a person by the State machineries under dubious circumstances without subjecting to any "due process" constitutes the severest form of violating the 'dignified self'. The notion of 'law and order' has been consistently evoked and propagated by the State as a legitimate ground to justify the infliction of such act on individual(s). Legitimacy for unleashing repressive State action is often sought to obtain from various legislative measures enacted by the Indian Parliament from time to time. The re-incarnation of Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act 1958 (AFSPA) from the debris of British Colonialism is one such instance.

Everyday experience reveals the evolution of a pattern whereby the object of State action is being framed as an 'extremist', 'insurgent', 'militant', 'separatist', 'secessionist' or a cadre of one of the proscribed outfits. The victim, whether a genuine member of a proscribed outfit or an innocent civilian, is always alleged to have been eliminated in 'retaliatory fire'. This is evident from the stereotype press statement handed out by the State agencies.

Response to such State repression comes in the form of instituting 'Joint Action Committee (JAC) against the Brutal Killing of XYZ', which has now evolved into a sort of conventional practice of demanding or seeking justice consequent to the killing of someone by the Indian State Forces (ISF). Such a JAC often negates the version of the State agencies and put forward a charter of demands on the basis of its claim that the 'victim' is an 'innocent' person. The rise of 'innocent' in public discourse is highly indicative of the intensity of structural violence perpetrated by the repressive Indian colonial regime on the civil population of Manipur.

The tragedy of the oppressed people of Manipur, however, lies in misarticulation and misrepresentation of the political reality by the mushrooming civil society groups that are actively engaged with divergent issues. Absence of a unified centre of power to steer the mass movement by identifying the 'core issue' has not only led to harrowing social confusion but also produces fissiparous tendency that has the potential of tearing apart the entire fabrics of our age-old civilisation.

The existing civil society groups appear to be more interested in struggling to establish and expand their respective 'space' than collectively engaging with the common cause. Such a tendency conspicuously underscores an inevitable manifestation of a deeper contradiction inherent in our social structure which is characterised by the presence of a highly fragmented middle class as a natural consequence of uneven exposure and response to the process of modernisation.

Various forms of State repression have been simply clubbed together into a single category known as Human Rights Violation. Popular response to violations of human rights by the Indian State Forces finds expression in the movement for revocation and repeal of the infamous AFSPA. Human Rights movement in Manipur is almost synonymous with the movement against the continued imposition of AFSPA.

This is a mere reflection of the general belief that human rights would be automatically restored to the people once AFSPA is removed or replaced with a more humane Act. Such a belief is too naive and outrageously ridiculous because of the fact that violation of civil liberties can also take place under any other equally draconian Acts like the TADA and POTA or such other Acts which the State may invoke according to the exigency of the situation.

There is absolutely no guarantee that human rights violations would come to a natural end following the abrogation of AFSPA as long as Army, Police and Para-Military Forces continue to remain in our land. Atrocious incidents have not ceased to happen in the Greater Imphal area in the aftermath of the removal of AFSPA from the said jurisdiction.

Excessive obsession with the notion of Human Rights and AFSPA hardly brings about any qualitative change in our society in terms of peace and order. The Great July Movement of 2004 against excesses committed by the Indian Army missed a great opportunity to raise the 'core issue' in spite of the unprecedented magnitude of the protest chiefly on account of misarticulation and misdirection of the issue. Undue concentration on marginal issue(s) has left the 'core issue' entirely unaddressed.

Wanton violation of human rights on a wide scale as can be witnessed in the present day Manipur is not necessarily due to the continued imposition of AFSPA or any other black laws. Collateral damage is bound to occur in any conflict situation like the one prevailing in Manipur. Heinous atrocities and other inhuman crimes committed by the Indian State Forces (ISF) in total disregard to all civilised norms of warfare recognised by the International Community needs to be understood from this perspective.

History is a living witness to the fact that various forms of military atrocities like rape, torture, summary execution, arbitrary arrest and detention, destruction of properties, burning of houses and paddy fields, forced labour, collective fine, looting, general harassment et al are natural occurrences in times of war and armed conflict between nations.

The core issue that needs immediate treatment is the armed conflict between India on the one hand and Manipur as represented by 'genuine' insurgent groups on the other. Here, a point of distinction ought to be drawn between genuine insurgent groups, which among others, fulfil certain criteria like clear political objective, firm ideological principles, highly disciplined armed cadres, commitment to International Humanitarian Laws and most importantly people's mandate and those armed gangs, which lack the above cited criteria but nevertheless operating under the mask of a revolutionary outfit.

Any insurgent group which is waging a war of liberation strictly in accordance with the international norms of civilised warfare cannot be branded as terrorists. The notion of terrorism should not be employed unscrupulously by the Indian Government just to delegitimise a National Liberation Movement.

A plethora of other marginal issues such as Human Rights violation, militarisation, ethnic conflict, territorial integrity, factional feuds and other general disorders are concomitant effects of Indo-Manipur political conflict that has gradually transformed into a military conflict.

The conflict between India and Manipur is historically rooted in the political controversy surrounding the signing of the infamous Merger Agreement, 1949. (In this write-up, I will not delve into the illegality of this agreement as I have already done it in my article titled, "Indo-Manipur Political Conflict : Exploring New Ways for Solution". The Sangai Express dated 27th & 28th Feb and 1st & 2nd March, 2007.

To be continued....