Defiling the idea of political dialogue :: Farce of peace talks
- The Sangai Express Editorial :: July 14, 2012 -

The classical understanding of a peace talk between a State and non-State actor invariably rests on the premise that the latter represents the political, social and economic interests of a certain group of people.

Political negotiation involves the understanding that two parties have certain political issues to thrash out across the table and this is precisely the reason why no Government engages in a political dialogue with plain criminals or gangsters.

The interesting question that arises here is what Delhi and Imphal intend to discuss or negotiate when they agree to roll out the dialogue table with a group or groups which have nothing much to distinguish them from plain criminals.

Such a trend cuts two ways. For one it is a sure fire way of making easy money while the good time lasts and secondly it gives them the leeway to command a position, a status, that it is engaged in a political dialogue with the Government, with no one actually knowing on whose behalf they are negotiating with the Government.

The dirty political hands behind these political negotiations are unmistakable.

That this situation suits some Government agencies well is also clear in that these groups can be used in cracking down on others, real or perceived.

It is hard to substantiate or prove, but it is clear that to quite a number of these dubious groups, entering into a political dialogue with the Government not only ensures them their daily bread and butter but also gives them the leeway to carry on their agenda by floating a new name.

Belittling or defiling the process of peace or the understanding of political dialogue, nothing less.

There is no need to take names, but the Government may well be asked what political issues and on whose behalf they are negotiating with such groups, when a deal is inked.

This is farcical and nonsensical.

It is nothing much more than giving political legitimacy to groups which were and are nothing but a bunch of desperadoes, wielding guns, looting and killing the public.

The time is well nigh at hand for the public to start questioning why the Government should even think of starting a process of political dialogue with such elements.

Or is it a case of the more one can assure one's nuisance value the more important one becomes politically ?

Take up a gun, loot and create mayhem and then grandly announce that it is ready for a political dialogue and the ground is well paved for the emergence of such groups in the future.

Such a trend has to be nipped in the bud.

It is not the armed movement alone which has thrown a spanner to the peaceful life of the people but the politics of starting political dialogues or cease fire with any of these groups, which represent no one but their own personal agenda and their own devil.

On the other hand this is all that more reason for other groups, which appear to have an issue, to stay away from the dialogue table.

Or is this a political conspiracy hatched by the people in the corridors of power ?