Governance now, dec 16-31, 2011
Ethnic conflict in Manipur is entwined with the territorial aspiration of the Naga insurgents. Unless the latter is resolved, peace will elude the state
What is a ‘supra-state’ body, the prospect of which the prime minister scotched during his Manipur visit?
The key to a lasting peace in Manipur, and in the neighbourhood, lies in the resolution of the larger territorial aspiration of the Naga insurgents after they dropped secession from India as their main demand – though not officially or formally but which is implicit in their joining the peace talk with the union government in 1998. The insurgents have been pressing for ‘Greater Nagalim’ and it includes Nagaland plus all Naga-inhabited areas outside the state – parts of Manipur, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh and even the neighbouring country, Myanmar. The union government ruled this option out because of strong resistance from Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh whose assemblies have passed unanimous resolutions committing to protect their territorial integrity.
As an alternative, the union government offered to discuss what it described as the ‘second best’ scenario – a ‘supra-state’. This is a unique federal arrangement in which the Nagas are masters of all their affairs both inside and outside Nagaland, except for ‘law and order’ which would continue to be with the respective state governments. This can be achieved only through a major constitutional amendment. Given the complete secrecy in which peace talks are being carried out since 1998, it is not clear if the subject was ever broached with all the state governments involved but found its way to the media in Manipur during the last economic blockade, sparking a huge public outrage.
It was this anger that the prime minister was trying to quell when he scotched the possibility of a ‘supra-state’ and assured the Manipuris their territorial integrity during his visit to the state on December 3. The timing and the vehemence with which he did so betray political considerations. Manipur is going to the polls early next year and his words bring cheers to two of the three important ethnic groups in the state – the dominating Meiteis and the Kukis involved in a territorial fight with the Nagas, the third ethnic group, at present.
The prime minister’s posturing may do a lot of good to his party’s electoral prospects, which hopes to renew its mandate with the help of the Meiteis and Kukis, but not so to the raging ethnic conflict in the region. It may even mean a setback to the Naga talks, even if a temporary one.
How is Manipur’s ethnic conflict linked to the Naga peace talk?
Sadar Hills is a Kuki-dominated area within the Naga-dominated Senapati district of Manipur. The Kukis want a separate district of Sadar Hills for themselves which is anathema to the Nagas fighting for a pan-Naga state that includes the entire Senapati district. The Kukis started the economic blockade demanding a separate district for themselves and withdrew it once the state government agreed to it. The Nagas began a parallel blockade in protest and withdrew it when they were assured that nothing of the sort would happen without consulting them. Political confusion persists and, hence, the Nagas said their withdrawal of the blockade was temporary.
This was not the first blockade of its kind. The latest cycle of blockades and violence in Manipur began in 2002 when the union government unilaterally announced extension of its ceasefire with the Naga insurgents (first announced in 1997) to all Naga-inhabited areas, including Manipur. The Meiteis, who control the levers of power in Manipur, rose in protest against what they saw an affront to their dignity and territorial integrity. The Kukis have their differences with the Meiteis but found a common cause in their territorial aspirations against the Nagas. An end to these conflicting aspirations is thus linked to the outcome of the Naga talks.
How far has the Naga talks progressed?
It has been a 13-year-long tortuous process that began a year after the union government entered into a ceasefire agreement with the Naga insurgents in 1997. Two interlocutors, Swaraj Kaushal, former governor of Mizoram, and K Padmanabhaiah, former union home secretary, took the process till 2009 without a breakthrough. However, peace talks meant two major gains – peace returned to Nagaland and the insurgents dropped their demand for secession. RS Pandey, retired chief secretary of Nagaland, is carrying the talks forward now.
The biggest hurdle continues to be the ‘shape’ of a pan-Naga state on which there seems no convergence. The uncompromising posture of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh means little leeway for the union government. Territorial integrity is a highly political and emotive issue for all the states involved and their people. So far, there is little indication of even starting a political dialogue with these states to find a middle ground.
There is a question mark over the peace talk itself. So far only the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Issac-Muivah) faction has joined the table. Though this is the most dominating group, any attempt at a lasting solution has to necessarily involve competing groups with divergent positions, like NSCN (Khapland) factions, NSCN-Unification and Naga National Council. All attempts at reconciliation and a joint talk have so far been thwarted by the NSCN(I-M).
Within this limited exercise of negotiating a peace deal, there are many other issues too on which there is no agreement. These include demands for separate constitution, citizenship, emblem, flag, currency and complete control over natural resources. The issues which have been more or less resolved include independent legislative body, economic policies and policies relating to language, education, transport, judiciary, civil services and so on. But those in the know say nothing counts until every single issue is resolved amicably. There can’t be any piecemeal solution.
The most disheartening part, however, is that even after such a long journey the mood in New Delhi is far from being upbeat. There is little hope of a breakthrough anytime soon. n
prasanna@governancenow.com
Ethnic conflict in Manipur is entwined with the territorial aspiration of the Naga insurgents. Unless the latter is resolved, peace will elude the state
What is a ‘supra-state’ body, the prospect of which the prime minister scotched during his Manipur visit?
The key to a lasting peace in Manipur, and in the neighbourhood, lies in the resolution of the larger territorial aspiration of the Naga insurgents after they dropped secession from India as their main demand – though not officially or formally but which is implicit in their joining the peace talk with the union government in 1998. The insurgents have been pressing for ‘Greater Nagalim’ and it includes Nagaland plus all Naga-inhabited areas outside the state – parts of Manipur, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh and even the neighbouring country, Myanmar. The union government ruled this option out because of strong resistance from Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh whose assemblies have passed unanimous resolutions committing to protect their territorial integrity.
As an alternative, the union government offered to discuss what it described as the ‘second best’ scenario – a ‘supra-state’. This is a unique federal arrangement in which the Nagas are masters of all their affairs both inside and outside Nagaland, except for ‘law and order’ which would continue to be with the respective state governments. This can be achieved only through a major constitutional amendment. Given the complete secrecy in which peace talks are being carried out since 1998, it is not clear if the subject was ever broached with all the state governments involved but found its way to the media in Manipur during the last economic blockade, sparking a huge public outrage.
It was this anger that the prime minister was trying to quell when he scotched the possibility of a ‘supra-state’ and assured the Manipuris their territorial integrity during his visit to the state on December 3. The timing and the vehemence with which he did so betray political considerations. Manipur is going to the polls early next year and his words bring cheers to two of the three important ethnic groups in the state – the dominating Meiteis and the Kukis involved in a territorial fight with the Nagas, the third ethnic group, at present.
The prime minister’s posturing may do a lot of good to his party’s electoral prospects, which hopes to renew its mandate with the help of the Meiteis and Kukis, but not so to the raging ethnic conflict in the region. It may even mean a setback to the Naga talks, even if a temporary one.
How is Manipur’s ethnic conflict linked to the Naga peace talk?
Sadar Hills is a Kuki-dominated area within the Naga-dominated Senapati district of Manipur. The Kukis want a separate district of Sadar Hills for themselves which is anathema to the Nagas fighting for a pan-Naga state that includes the entire Senapati district. The Kukis started the economic blockade demanding a separate district for themselves and withdrew it once the state government agreed to it. The Nagas began a parallel blockade in protest and withdrew it when they were assured that nothing of the sort would happen without consulting them. Political confusion persists and, hence, the Nagas said their withdrawal of the blockade was temporary.
This was not the first blockade of its kind. The latest cycle of blockades and violence in Manipur began in 2002 when the union government unilaterally announced extension of its ceasefire with the Naga insurgents (first announced in 1997) to all Naga-inhabited areas, including Manipur. The Meiteis, who control the levers of power in Manipur, rose in protest against what they saw an affront to their dignity and territorial integrity. The Kukis have their differences with the Meiteis but found a common cause in their territorial aspirations against the Nagas. An end to these conflicting aspirations is thus linked to the outcome of the Naga talks.
How far has the Naga talks progressed?
It has been a 13-year-long tortuous process that began a year after the union government entered into a ceasefire agreement with the Naga insurgents in 1997. Two interlocutors, Swaraj Kaushal, former governor of Mizoram, and K Padmanabhaiah, former union home secretary, took the process till 2009 without a breakthrough. However, peace talks meant two major gains – peace returned to Nagaland and the insurgents dropped their demand for secession. RS Pandey, retired chief secretary of Nagaland, is carrying the talks forward now.
The biggest hurdle continues to be the ‘shape’ of a pan-Naga state on which there seems no convergence. The uncompromising posture of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh means little leeway for the union government. Territorial integrity is a highly political and emotive issue for all the states involved and their people. So far, there is little indication of even starting a political dialogue with these states to find a middle ground.
There is a question mark over the peace talk itself. So far only the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Issac-Muivah) faction has joined the table. Though this is the most dominating group, any attempt at a lasting solution has to necessarily involve competing groups with divergent positions, like NSCN (Khapland) factions, NSCN-Unification and Naga National Council. All attempts at reconciliation and a joint talk have so far been thwarted by the NSCN(I-M).
Within this limited exercise of negotiating a peace deal, there are many other issues too on which there is no agreement. These include demands for separate constitution, citizenship, emblem, flag, currency and complete control over natural resources. The issues which have been more or less resolved include independent legislative body, economic policies and policies relating to language, education, transport, judiciary, civil services and so on. But those in the know say nothing counts until every single issue is resolved amicably. There can’t be any piecemeal solution.
The most disheartening part, however, is that even after such a long journey the mood in New Delhi is far from being upbeat. There is little hope of a breakthrough anytime soon. n
prasanna@governancenow.com
No comments:
Post a Comment