Tag: Editorial

What a relief that those of us in the newspaper business can for once, after nearly two months, write without a sense of guilt about issues other than demographic concerns and anxieties. It is with such a sigh of relief that we too write of the menace of rabies today. A 2015 study published in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases said of the approximate 59,000 people who die from rabies every year, an overwhelming majority are in Asia and Africa. India alone, the report says, accounts for 20,847 deaths, more than one-third of the world`™s total, giving it the highest incidence of rabies globally. Furthermore, it is believed the actual number of rabies deaths in India could be much higher for many go unreported. Probably with a view to keeping with the World Health Organisation, WHO, pledge to eliminate rabies from the Asian region by the year 2020, in a number of Indian cities, stray dog culling has become common. Images of slaughtered dogs that appear in the media are however distressing, and many animal rights workers have begun campaigns to have the authorities tackle the problem in less cruel ways. Dogs after all are man`™s best friends. Manipur is not altogether free of the problem. Last year Churachanpur, and to a lesser extent, the two Imphal districts were in panic as rabies became an epidemic in these districts. Considering the manner in which dogs are reared in the state, with only very few owners caring to have their pets vaccinated regularly, the problem can surface again any time, and with costly consequences. The government must therefore take precautions in advance. We wouldn`™t recommend culling, but it must begin keeping stock of strays as well as domestic animals, be they cattle, horses but most specifically dogs, the latter being traditionally vulnerable to become carriers of rabies. While the government must take the responsibility of vaccinating and immunizing the strays, it must also think of a way to make it mandatory for owners to register their pets, and to vaccinate them. Perhaps it is a good idea to make pet owning against licenses only.

But it is not dogs and cats alone that become strays and live on the streets. There are also an increasing number of cattle and, surprisingly, horses. More than dogs and cats, they are a pitiable sight. It is not rare to see many of them painfully limping, lamed by motorcars, simply roaming around aimlessly on public tar tarmacs. Obviously, nobody wants them on their property, and understandably so, leaving them to make government public lands their homes, and in the cities, the most readily available are public roads. We wonder what they would be eating, left to fend for themselves in a city like Imphal, increasingly a concrete jungle. It is cruel for them, but it is also extremely inconvenient and even hazardous for traffic. The government must apply its mind to do something about this problem too. It must find a way to make their owners step forward to reclaim them or else they must be treated as ownerless and thus solely the government`™s responsibility to do whatever it thinks fit with them.

The stray animal phenomenon, especially in Imphal, also reflects a general mindset. It is indicative of the place`™s tendency to be obsessed with form without caring much for the substance. For a predominantly Hindu city, many of whom would object to cow slaughter, there is an embedded hypocrisy in this unconcern for the fate of homeless cattle on the streets. The same hypocrisy is unmistakable in the sight of lame horses hopping around on the roads with their dangling, bleeding limbs, in a land that prides itself for its ancient polo heritage. What is too often missed is, when the form is not matched by substance, the former becomes hollow. This is one of Manipur`™s abiding problems. The conceited nature of the collective ego demonstrated in these cases, is also very much the hurdle in so many other of its problem solving efforts. The time must come when everybody simply have to sit down and reassess themselves against the age they belong to. The form and the substance, or in these days of China obsession, the yin and yang, must be made to come to a stable equilibrium.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/regulating-pets-needed/

It is often said with a touch of sarcasm that when the British inherited Kashmir in 1846 after defeating the Sikhs in the First Sikh War, they also inherited a boundary problem. Kashmir`™s Dogra rulers were under the Sikhs at the time, and defeating the Sikhs meant the gift of Kashmir to the victors. And the British inherited a boundary problem precisely because there was no boundary. Explaining why this was so half a century later, Lord Curzon, two years after he retired as Viceroy of India, in his famous Romanes Lecture 1907, titled `Frontiers` had this to say: `In Asiatic countries it would be true to say that demarcation has never taken place except under European pressure and by the intervention of European agents.` Explaining this further he said: `In the first place the idea of a demarcated Frontier is itself an essentially modern conception, and finds little or no place in the ancient world. In Asia, the oldest inhabited continent, there has always been a strong instinctive aversion to the acceptance of fixed boundaries, arising partly from the nomadic habits of the people, partly from the dislike of precise arrangements that is typical of the oriental mind, but more still from the idea that in the vicissitudes of fortune more is to be expected from an unsettled than from a settled Frontier.`

Quite in tune with Curzon`™s insight, if Asiatic societies were not too concerned with exactly demarcated and administered boundaries, the British, as also all Europeans, find themselves extremely uneasy in situation where they find themselves with the prospect of governing territories with no exact boundaries. After inheriting Kashmir in 1846, they immediately began taking up measures to draw Kashmir`™s boundaries. This involved, among others, sending out expeditions into the mountainous territories to decide where the most defensible position for the British would be, together with setting up boundary commissions after commissions. One of these exploratory missions was led by Capt. Francis Younghusband, the same officer who much later as a colonel would lead the infamous Younghusband Expedition in 1904 to Tibet. The recommendations from these explorations were that India`™s natural and most defensible boundary should be the Karakoram watershed. However, politics of the time determined that this recommendation was not totally accepted. If militarily, the Karakoram ridge was the most logical boundary for India, on a larger geopolitical consideration prompted by Britain`™s cold war with Russia at the time, generally referred to as the Great Game, another lobby in the British establishment wanted to extend the Indian border right up to the Kuenlun mountain watershed, a mountain range that ran parallel to the Karakoram, and in the process incorporate the Yarkand river basin and the forbidding white desert of Aksai Chin, so that Russia cannot have a passage to Tibet. The British ultimately left this border ambiguous, coming up with three different alignments, one which incorporates the Aksai Chin totally, another partially, and yet a third which left out the Aksai Chin altogether and made the Karakoram ridge the Indian boundary, leaving room for intractable dispute between India and China over it which continues to this day.

This longish account of Kashmir boundary history was meant as a pointer to what would have been a similar scenario in the Northeast. Before the British arrived, although there were several established `Paddy States` as James Scott called them, they too would not have had the exactly demarcated and administered borders. When the British annexed Assam in 1826, this was indeed what it was, and as in Kashmir, the British, began immediately to fix boundaries. The first boundary they established formally was with Manipur by a treaty in 1833. This treaty also made it obligatory for Manipur to extend military support to the British in its expeditions in the region. But not satisfied with this, the British also wanted to establish Manipur`™s eastern boundary, quite in keeping with the European mindset of creating buffers that Curzon also talked of in his Romanes Lecture. In 1826, after the defeat of the Burmese in the 1st Anglo Burmese War, the Manipur boundary was fixed at the Chindwin River, thereby awarding Kabaw Valley to Manipur. In 1834, one year after fixing Assam`™s boundary with Manipur, the British decided to concede the Kabaw Valley to the Burmese who had been protesting all along, on the plea it can be better administered by Mandalay. This is not an argument about who deserved which territory, but the point we want to raise is, from what were once very fluid frontiers between various kingdoms and principalities before the British arrived, hard boundaries were being drawn, therefore would have meant considerable readjustments amongst frontier tribes. This was indeed the case when Chassad Kukis began to be restive attacking Tangkhul village in Manipur territory. They claimed they were in Burmese jurisdiction when pursued by Manipur authorities and that they were Manipur subjects when chastised by the Burmese. To take care of this administrative problem, at the behest of British Political Agent in Manipur, James Johnstone, Manipur`™s eastern boundary was readjusted in 1881 incorporating the Chassad settlements completely within Manipur. These outlooks to frontiers and boundaries should not be forgotten in dealing and resolving the issue of migration currently gripping Manipur.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/frontiers-to-boundaries/

The entangle over the demand for the introduction of the Inner Line Permit System, ILPS, or an equivalent act in Manipur to control influx of migrants settlers hopefully will be resolved tomorrow when the JCILPS meets the government for a final time before the bill is tabled before the Manipur Assembly. As to whether the bill will have a smooth passage to become law is another matter, but the period of lull that will hopefully follow must be used to reflect on all that has happened. A lot has indeed happened in the two months that went by. Street protests in Imphal and other valley districts that often degenerated into chaos and mayhem; damages caused to public and private properties; the flash point of the clashes at Moreh and more. Besides all the action on the ground, the internet too had transformed into a virtual free for all battlefield, where abuses and counter abuses flew in all directions possible. Especially after the Moreh incident, this grew dangerously close to another form of ethnic feud, but the only saving grace of this battlefield is, though ugly and unseemly, nobody gets injured however intense the combats. Though the open declarations of hatreds and dislikes between communities would have shocked anybody, in a way it could prove to be a beneficial purge in the end. Sometimes, as psychologists tell us, it is therapeutic to even scream at the sky, or at each other, and vent all that was hidden within, instead of keeping the negative emotions closeted within while pretending bonhomie on the outside during social interactions. Quite by coincidence, these face-offs had another component too. The declaration of a `Framework Agreement` between the NSCN(IM) and the Government of India on August 3, brought in a third dimension to the cold war.

All the fang-baring and venom spitting then, we hope will result in new and more realistic intercommunity relationships in Manipur. What has become clear is (and this is not a new thing though) that the interests and aspirations of the different ethnic groups in Manipur are not at all homogenous. As we have reminded on several occasions, even during these last two months, it is the valley community, the Meiteis to be precise, who must leave its nostalgia about their past and come to terms with the fact of these divergence of interests in the modern times. They must not presume foreknowledge of what other communities want, or claim proprietorship of the state`™s interest. There is, and there will have to be, something as Manipur`™s interest (geography above all determines this) common to all who have made the state their home, but this common interest would have to be a result of periodic ratification. There are plenty of forums on which this can happen, beginning with the State Assembly, to interactions between civil bodies. As in any meaningful federation however, besides these common interests, there can be and should be individual interests of the different ethnic components too.

An illustration will help. Take the United Kingdom of England, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Each of them once had their separate flags. The flag of St. George for England, the flag of St. Andrews for Scotland and the flag of St. Patrick for Northern Ireland. The Union Jack, which is the flag of the United Kingdom, is a combination of these three flags. Flag of St. George and of St. Andrew, both of which has a white banner with a red crucifix running all across its length and breath, are nearly identical so have been conjoined. The flag of St. Patrick is also a white banner with a red cross that runs diagonally across the rectangle of the banner. After changing the background to deep blue lined with thick white borders, these emblems from the three components of the nation are combined to form the now a familiar sight `“ the Union Jack. This is the flag of the UK and it is used in all its official functions. However, in sporting tournaments, such as the Football World Cup, they compete separately, which is why many of us would have noticed with surprise the flag that come out during England`™s World Cup matches, is the flag of St. George, the white banner with a red crucifix spanning across it, strongly reminiscent of the images we are familiar with of the Crusade of medieval Europe, and interestingly of the annals of the legendary archer, Robinhood who fought for justice of the Saxon peasants against the Norman rulers of England of the time. Lest we are confused by these accounts of flags, the Republic of Ireland (which is different from Northern Ireland), and not a part of the UK, we know has its own separate flag, and a very secular choice of three colours identical to the Indian flag, but running in vertical rows and obviously without the Ashok Chakra. The point we are making is, it is time for Manipur to delineate between the larger interests of the state from those of the individual communities. Beyond the common interest then, if the interests of the hill communities are protected, it entails that the valley`™s interest too must receive protection to give parity. The inability to strike the right equation so far, in which the valley is increasingly beginning to see itself as the one at the receiving end, is another big reason for the kind of trouble we are witnessing today. The pursuit of these separate interests must however not be at the cost of each other.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/manipur-and-federalism/

The entangle over the demand for the introduction of the Inner Line Permit System, ILPS, or an equivalent act in Manipur to control influx of migrants settlers hopefully will be resolved tomorrow when the JCILPS meets the government for a final time before the bill is tabled before the Manipur Assembly. As to whether the bill will have a smooth passage to become law is another matter, but the period of lull that will hopefully follow must be used to reflect on all that has happened. A lot has indeed happened in the two months that went by. Street protests in Imphal and other valley districts that often degenerated into chaos and mayhem; damages caused to public and private properties; the flash point of the clashes at Moreh and more. Besides all the action on the ground, the internet too had transformed into a virtual free for all battlefield, where abuses and counter abuses flew in all directions possible. Especially after the Moreh incident, this grew dangerously close to another form of ethnic feud, but the only saving grace of this battlefield is, though ugly and unseemly, nobody gets injured however intense the combats. Though the open declarations of hatreds and dislikes between communities would have shocked anybody, in a way it could prove to be a beneficial purge in the end. Sometimes, as psychologists tell us, it is therapeutic to even scream at the sky, or at each other, and vent all that was hidden within, instead of keeping the negative emotions closeted within while pretending bonhomie on the outside during social interactions. Quite by coincidence, these face-offs had another component too. The declaration of a `Framework Agreement` between the NSCN(IM) and the Government of India on August 3, brought in a third dimension to the cold war.

All the fang-baring and venom spitting then, we hope will result in new and more realistic intercommunity relationships in Manipur. What has become clear is (and this is not a new thing though) that the interests and aspirations of the different ethnic groups in Manipur are not at all homogenous. As we have reminded on several occasions, even during these last two months, it is the valley community, the Meiteis to be precise, who must leave its nostalgia about their past and come to terms with the fact of these divergence of interests in the modern times. They must not presume foreknowledge of what other communities want, or claim proprietorship of the state`™s interest. There is, and there will have to be, something as Manipur`™s interest (geography above all determines this) common to all who have made the state their home, but this common interest would have to be a result of periodic ratification. There are plenty of forums on which this can happen, beginning with the State Assembly, to interactions between civil bodies. As in any meaningful federation however, besides these common interests, there can be and should be individual interests of the different ethnic components too.

An illustration will help. Take the United Kingdom of England, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Each of them once had their separate flags. The flag of St. George for England, the flag of St. Andrews for Scotland and the flag of St. Patrick for Northern Ireland. The Union Jack, which is the flag of the United Kingdom, is a combination of these three flags. Flag of St. George and of St. Andrew, both of which has a white banner with a red crucifix running all across its length and breath, are nearly identical so have been conjoined. The flag of St. Patrick is also a white banner with a red cross that runs diagonally across the rectangle of the banner. After changing the background to deep blue lined with thick white borders, these emblems from the three components of the nation are combined to form the now a familiar sight `“ the Union Jack. This is the flag of the UK and it is used in all its official functions. However, in sporting tournaments, such as the Football World Cup, they compete separately, which is why many of us would have noticed with surprise the flag that come out during England`™s World Cup matches, is the flag of St. George, the white banner with a red crucifix spanning across it, strongly reminiscent of the images we are familiar with of the Crusade of medieval Europe, and interestingly of the annals of the legendary archer, Robinhood who fought for justice of the Saxon peasants against the Norman rulers of England of the time. Lest we are confused by these accounts of flags, the Republic of Ireland (which is different from Northern Ireland), and not a part of the UK, we know has its own separate flag, and a very secular choice of three colours identical to the Indian flag, but running in vertical rows and obviously without the Ashok Chakra. The point we are making is, it is time for Manipur to delineate between the larger interests of the state from those of the individual communities. Beyond the common interest then, if the interests of the hill communities are protected, it entails that the valley`™s interest too must receive protection to give parity. The inability to strike the right equation so far, in which the valley is increasingly beginning to see itself as the one at the receiving end, is another big reason for the kind of trouble we are witnessing today. The pursuit of these separate interests must however not be at the cost of each other.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/manipur-and-federalism/

An informed discourse on what `development` should consist of seems to be what is most essential in the state today. Unfortunately, such a discourse precisely is what has been in extremely low decibel for all this while. In its place are impassioned yells and roars from the streets defining `development` agendas. The obvious conclusion is, while the decibel level of one should be raised, the voices from the other side need a great deal of moderation. Unfortunately, neither is happening. Quite often, demands are also self-contradictory but the place has been desensitized to the extent that it seldom discovers these contradictory elements in its visions. This shortfall, we are of the opinion results also from a peculiar narcissism in the society that makes a larger section of its citizenry crave only for the fruits, without even bothering to think of the cost of having these `“ an attitude defined by such discordant traditions as demands for more electricity without paying taxes for it, more holidays but fatter salary packets, more employment but less work etc. Too much is taken for granted as the responsibility of the welfare state institution, even to the ridiculous extent of heaping all ordinary burdens expected to be borne by the individual citizens on the former.

But first and foremost, it is the failure of our intelligentsia in working up an active discourse on what should be `development`. The continually updated proceeding of such a credible debate should have been omnipresent to inform, moderate and influence both the ordinary citizens as well as the highbrow policy makers in the state`™s corridors of power. But alas this has never been and it is unlikely to become so in the near future. So today, on the hot issue of Tipaimukh Dam for instance, one is still not sure what the rational, scientific standpoint should be. It is easy to latch on to the state-ist, Nehruvian vision of magnificent modern multipurpose dams as the modern temples of India, as much as it is easy to simply jump onto the bandwagon of current mood of political correctness and say no dams whatever their fruits. But neither would constitute what can be defined as a morally and intellectually autonomous decision of the rational self. Our earnest plea is for the state`™s intelligentsia to prepare the grounds on which such rational autonomous decisions, both at the individual as well as at the collective levels, become possible. And this is extremely important, for indeed understanding `development` is very much also about understanding the future. This is all the more urgent as we are witnessing the commissioning of the Mapithel Dam, and the horrifying spectacle of Chadong village getting submerged slowly but surely right before everybody`™s eyes.

It is interesting that the problem is not confined to the underdeveloped regions of the world alone. It is in fact one which has begun to plague the industrialised West, in particular Western Europe. Writing on the violent unrests that once gripped France over the government`™s new labour law that seeks to make its reputed lethargic work force more competitive, well known columnist, Robert J Samuelson had called it a dilemma of advanced democracies. `Hardly anyone wants to surrender the benefits and protections of today`™s generous welfare state, but the fierce attachment to these costly and self-defeating programs prevents Europe from preparing for a future that, though it may be deplored, is inevitable. Actually, it`™s not the future. It`™s the present.` He added: `the student protesters in France think that if they march long enough or burn enough cars, they can make the future go away. No such luck.` The particular piece of French legislation which was disputed empowers an employer to hire new recruits on probation for two years so that he has the freedom to discard those not up to expectation during or at the end of the period unconditionally and without cost. The lesson for our protests-torn region is, while most protests have valid reasons, they must have to be moderated by informed, intelligent discourses that are clearly able to indicate what the desirable shape of the future might be. After all, as so succinctly said by the Samuelson, street politics can alter policies, but they cannot make the future go away.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/present-tense/

The debate over the harm, or good, the British colonialism did to India, sparked off by former minister, and Congress MP, Shashi Tharoor`™s impassioned speech in an Oxford University debate a month ago, is interesting from the perspective of Manipur, and indeed from that of much of the rest of the Northeast, especially a thread of argument which emerged from it. Tharoor attacked the British of plundering India and making themselves rich from the loots, for this he argued Britain should pay reparation. Tharoor may have a point here for Britain through history has been all too eager to impose such payments when it came to others. The most outrageous of this, we now know, is on impoverished Tibet in 1904. Col. Francis Younghusband invaded the Monastery State in that year, then under the 13th Dalai Lama, at the behest of then viceroy of India, Lord Curzon, who was certain the Tibetan spiritual and temporal leader was making secret deals Tsarist Russia, Britain`™s arch rival in the Cold War of the time known as the Great Game. After massacring ill-trained and ill-equipped Tibetan soldiers defending Lhasa, Britain asked the nation to pay Rs. 75 lakhs to cover the cost incurred on Britain in sending Col. Younghusband to punish them. No bullying could have been more complete than this. As to what happened thereafter is intriguing, but not a matter for this editorial to delve further. Suffices it to say, it was this kind of arrogance in dealing with what they considered natives, which also left India not only impoverished, but depleted in morale, British Colonialism having bent and broken what was once upon a time a proud spirit, and leaving it servile and insecure.

But if this was the harm, others have since Tharoor`™s spell binding speech come out with why India also gained much from British Colonialism. If Britain had fleeced India white, it also left behind many priceless legacies. This is not just about the often cited examples of the Indian Railways, the Indian Army and Parliamentary Democracy, great as they are, but something to do with the modern spirit of India `“ the spirit of liberalism `“ defined by a complete faith in constitutional law and codified procedural justice amenable to modifications, again by codified procedures, in keeping with the spirit of the times. India imbibed this spirit unlike most other former colonies, undoubtedly a gift of the enlightened leadership of the time, Gandhi, Nehru, Patel, Azad, Ambedkar and more, some loved, some hated, in the region today, who were careful not to throw away the baby with the bathwater when they rejected colonialism. So while others sunk into military dictatorship, in India democracy sailed through rough waters rather comfortably except for the brief hiccup of Emergency 40 years ago.

Fareed Zakaria has a very interesting thing to say on this in his book, `Future of Freedom`. According to him, between liberalism and democracy, the former is more fundamental. Liberalism will ensure democracy but the opposite scenario where democracy precedes liberalism can be tragic. In fact, in an illiberal situation, democracy can be dangerous, and this has been adequately demonstrated in the Balkans where the newly liberated but still illiberal former Communist states, chose to become democracies without preparation, and ended up in genocidal wars. Illiberal democracy can divide a polity dangerously into vote banks and ethnic conclaves. This was also witnessed by the world in the US-imposed democracy experiment in Iraq. In the decade since it was supposedly made a democracy, the country has degenerated beyond recognition. Zakaria has another very illustrative example. Hong Kong was a colony of Britain till 1997, therefore till that date, not a democracy. But even as a colony it had all the liberal institutions: a tradition of constitutional adjudication, procedural justice, liberal scientific education etc, so that its transition to democracy was without any birth pangs. It was a simple step over. Liberalism (defined as a belief in these liberal institutions) as against neo-liberalism (which is a belief in the inherent justice of the laissez-faire ) is not just about a goodness of spirit and generosity. It is, on the other hand, an enlightened vested interest. It will ultimately pay political dividends to the believer generously. The inherent fairness of the laissez-faire, we too have no doubt, is a deliberate and malicious lie of neo-liberals.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/enlightened-vested-interest/

As Manipur sinks to one of its lowest moments, what is evidently missing is any semblance of governance. The government it seems has abandoned its responsibility of keeping law or order, leaving this onerous matter in the hands of anybody who wants to assume it. Utter chaos is the result. Although since yesterday, ever since the breakthrough in the talks between the JCILPS and the government, there is some calm returning, it can never be certain when the state will plunge back into inferno. This is so, because the issue of the demand for introduction of the Inner Line Permit System in the state is far from over. Even if all goes well as regards the demand of the JCILPS to have the five points it raised included in the new proposed draft bill, there is no certainty that the bill will have a smooth passage in the Assembly to become law. In fact, the possibility that it is kept in abeyance by the Governor or the President of India, which actually means the Union Cabinet, is not entirely remote, particularly if it is seen as stepping outside the limits set by the Constitution of India. In the event of this happening, the dreadful question in everybody`™s mind is what next? Will the paralysis of the state administration continue ad infinitum and at what cost?
If the government had kept its ears close to the ground and had felt the pulse of the people accurately, it would probably have been given the foresight to anticipate the growing apprehension amongst the people at the prospect of being demographically marginalised, thereby prompting it to take remedial measures in advance. It also only needed to have looked around to see how similar apprehensions have resulted in murderous violence all over the Northeast and neighbouring regions and be concerned enough to take precautions. Deadly demography wars still break out periodically in Bodoland in Assam. There have also been similar wars in the state`™s Karbi Anglong and North Cachar regions. Earlier still there was the Assam Agitation for deportation of `foreigners` which lasted five long years, climaxing in the gruesome massacre at Nellie in 1983. It is also extremely relevant that the Assam Agitation in the end yielded little with regards to the central issue of restructuring demography, though in the bargain the state received an IIT, an oil refinery and such other sops. Meghalaya too which is as much in the grip of a demographic transformation as Manipur, sees these ethnic tensions periodically. Nagaland which has the Inner Line Permit System, is still not free of this scourge. Two other Northeast states, Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram, which also have the Inner Line System, are relatively better off, though the fear of an outsider invasion is not altogether absent, as was evident in the Chakma and Bru issues the two states were afflicted by. Beyond the Northeast, there have been the Rohingya issue which today has become a grave international concern, and a scar on Myanmar`™s reputation. Tibet`™s complaint of Han Chinese overwhelming their original population, and Bhutan`™s controversial eviction of nearly 2 lakh Nepalis from South Bhutan in the 1980s, are some indication how widespread this problem is in the entire region.

These are worrying trends and should have kept the Manipur government alert. In fact, it should have in anticipation, come up with the move to check immigration through appropriate legislation on its own, long ago. Such a stitch in time would have saved plenty. Now, since things were allowed to slip to a critical point, it was only to be expected that that street politics would ultimately take over the agenda. Look at the turmoil the state is in and it does seem this will not be the end either. For once, if the entire government establishment had kept away its obsession with easy unearned money from corruption, and put their entire energy in the serious business of fine tuning the government machinery and making it run as it should, the place would have been saved of the endless chain of tragedies it is forced to bear. But, there is little doubt even now that once the current problem settles to somewhat an equilibrium, it will be back to square one, and the official establishment would be back to the old game of organised robbery of the state exchequer, forgetting all about governance.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/governance-absence-tragedy/

In diplomacy and politics there are only interests and no friends or enemies they day. This time worn dictum of statecraft is what deserves a closer look in the present day Manipur. This is particularly so because the place continues pathetically unable to get itself out of the time warp of seeing only in terms of primeval allies and adversaries. Catch phrases like `indigenous peoples` and `outsiders`, and the presumptions all indigenous peoples are natural allies and that all outsiders are not to be trusted, today dominate discussions and concerns at every level. First in the elite circles then these vocabularies and jargons percolate and come to be flaunted with a sense of mission in Manipur`™s familiar brand of street politics. Every now and then jolts come to shake up these presumptions. The `indigenous peoples` often discover they have no goodwill at all for each other, and sometimes even nurture mutual ill will, yet the illusion persists. The same drama plays out in the reverse when it is discovered that the so called outsiders can be good friends and allies. One is reminded of Albert Camus`™ `The Guest`, where the divide between the `outsider` and the `insider` in the ultimate analysis is never bridged, even when every condition and quality needed to cement human bondages are present. The guest remains a guest till the end, never to be part of the host community. Wonder if it is the English translation from French which preferred the word `guest`, and if the original French did not mean what we in the Northeast, and in particular Manipur, understand by the term `outsider`, for the story fits our situation perfectly.

It is time to leave this bubble behind before there are more disappointments and souring of relations. The way to go is to identify these `interests` realpolitik prescribes and then from a close consideration of them, renew and rebuild the avenues for friendships. But as a believer that a zero sum game is imminently avoidable, and to differ from the old dictum quoted about, this friendship building exercise does not have to necessarily create enemies. What should have come across long ago is the realisation that the primacy in politics is on `interests` and not imagined traditional friendships or enmities. Indeed, with the inevitable process of the shifts of `interests` in keeping with the ebbs and flows of the tides of time, the latter will change too. Fostering and preserving communal harmony then should be about ensuring these `interests` remain real and shared. This can only be done by building institutional structures of power sharing through consensus. This project unfortunately has never been taken up in earnest or else remained mired in platitudes and homilies.

As we have often argued in these columns, there are certain externalities beyond anybody`™s volition to change making it necessary for everybody to think in terms of peaceful co-existence, for there is no other way. This will be the most fundamental and given `interest` spanning everybody in the state. Even at the height of spiting each other, people in the same boat cannot wish the boat to sink. Manipur`™s geography is this way. If the Inner Line Permit System, if it does become law in the state, is to be seen as a good fence designed to make good neighbours, within the state too similar goodwill fences, some of which already exist, must be thought, lest the communities continue to step on each other`™s toes. This inner fence exists to some extent already, and the hills enjoy some measure of land protection. Now with a Naga Accord in the horizon, what is certain is, part of the bargain in the final Naga settlement will be more autonomy for the Naga dominated districts. Probably this would mean similar autonomy for the remaining hill district of Churachandpur as well. For obvious reasons, this will not be taken well by the valley districts, unless there is something for these districts too, to give justice parity. There obviously have been many ways the valley by its arrogance and insensitivities hurt the hills, and amends must be made for this, but cornering and pushing the valley against the wall relentlessly cannot be in the interest of peace either. The ILP discussion must also be brought within this equation. It must not lead to more Moreh like situations, as it does seem it will, particularly if the clock is sought to be turned back six decades to define domicile. In any case, even if such a bill is introduced in the Assembly, there is no guarantee it will not be shot down on the way by the Union or else the courts. The Assam experience is there to recall. If in the 1980s the demand for a cut off year of 1951 to define domicile was not acceptable, and finally the agreed year was 1971, just about a decade backdated, and even then it remained impossible to execute, to ask for backdating to 1951 in 2015, may amount to predicating the doom of the initiative at the very start. There is no doubt that huge influx of immigrants from numerically far larger cultures can be a danger to the identities of small ethnic communities, but measures to check this must not amount to asking for the impossible, or causing undue hurts and injustices to others. It will do everybody, including the initiative itself good, to think of a more realistic and liberal date, if it cannot be just about freezing further influx from the current date.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/only-shared-interests-bind/

From all that we have seen in the past one month of street agitations, it is obvious the state is on the verge of a dangerous precipice today. As demonstrated by the clashes at Moreh today, one small spark can ignite an inferno. Thankfully good senses prevailed this time, and although the clashes were ugly, the trouble was prevented from either persisting or spreading to cause more damages. What is also evident from the incident is, the mistrust between the communities is extreme. This is apparent even on internet discussion circles. People, even those who would be considered enlightened and therefore capable of detached assessment of the situation, were surprisingly so eager to presume guilt or innocence of the different parties in the clash depending on their own ethnic affiliations and personal biases, without even waiting to confirm facts on the ground. If the event was tragic, the sideshows on the internet were saddening. It is depressing too to realise how much most of us are prisoners of our own perspectives, often making us miss realities beyond individual narrow visions. There were of course very mature and moderating voices too, and all credits must go to them for preventing all the hatred generated from spreading.

What is also clear beyond doubt is the communities in Manipur have extreme distrust for each other. What one community does, the next one suspects therefore tacitly or openly they all end up opposing each other. This will take the place nowhere far. But mere sermons cannot be the remedy for this malaise. Invocation of past fraternal relation cannot be the salvation either although this has lessons to offer. The way forward then is to think in terms of a social architecture for the future. For a multi-community society like Manipur, this architecture would have to be in the nature of a federal power structure. All decisions that are billed to be in everybody`™s interest must have to be endorsed by a consensual voice of everybody first. Nobody must be taken for granted even for decisions which are quite obviously in everybody`™s interest. What must also be realised is, it is not so much history which binds the communities together, and even if this were so, history is a dynamic process and is constantly in a flux. It is given to changes. Even a nation is a daily plebiscite as Ernst Renan tells us. What on the other hand is the greater and more permanent binding sinew is geography. And certain geographies are integral and any attempt to separate them will result in conflict. The hill-valley bondage in Manipur is similarly placed. Each nourishes the other, but at another level, each also sees the other as a threat. Robert Kaplan has many different sketches of similar violent geographies from across the globe in his extremely readable book `Revenge of Geography`. Manipur`™s hills and valley may not like each other, but let it also be accepted that there is extreme conflict potential in severing the geographical bond between them.

Another point often missed, but must have to be taken note of is, in a multi-community society, elementary laws of arithmetic determine that 50 per cent is not necessarily the majority mark. It can be much smaller. The fallacy can come in another shape. In the current rage over a swelling `outsider` population for instance, the dreaded figure often cited as the number of `outsiders` is a third of state`™s population. But this `outsider` is not one bloc. If broken down to individual communities, the percentage each occupies would still be small. Many of them are already to a great extent indigenised. It would be prudent therefore not to treat them as a single bloc. In a related but not identical situation, there is a very interesting discussion on why the academic subject of sociology was never strong in British universities unlike in continental countries, in particular France. The explanation offered is, the British were able to so effectively translate their knowledge and intuition of anthropology into politics so effectively that they did not need sociology. Conversely, for the French, whose politics failed miserably, pushed out of the race for colonies in the industrial age by the British, sociology was an introspective reflection on how their politic went wrong. So when the British arrived in India, if they had also looked at India as one bloc, they may not have dared to dream of ever conquering it. But here is where their anthropology began working. They broke down the society into components and dealt with each component differently, ultimately conquering the entire sub-continent. They would for instance categorise people into martial and non-martial categories and think of different ways of dealing with either. Not in the sinister sense of conquest by divide and rule, but in working out harmonious community equations, such success stories must be recalled and emulated.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/federal-future-needed/

It is unfortunate that the law and order situation in the valley districts has been allowed to deteriorate to the extent we are witnessing today, compromising in the process public opinion of a popular movement, and one which nobody can doubt is born out of a very legitimate concern. From all appearances, the movement is now virtually rudderless. Nobody is sure when it is safe to move out of home for work in the morning or else for any unforeseen emergency, lest they discover to their surprise they cannot return home. Without notice, anybody anywhere can simply decide to block roads, stranding them. In the past one month, there cannot be many who has not gone through this harrowing experience, and the trouble is, those blocking the roads seem to take pride in exercising their sense of power on hapless commuters, who probably are as much supporters of the larger movement to have the Inner Line Permit System implemented in the state, as them. The residual disenchantment caused by such radicalism has invariably begun to split a public movement, especially between those in essential services and have to be on duty even during the worst of crisis. Medical practitioners, media persons, and a horde of others each day unfortunately visited by personal medical and other emergencies, or else are duty bound to perform family religious obligations, have been the worst hit. It is not too late yet. Let those spearheading the movement make course corrections while the situation is still not beyond redemption, especially if this unrest is destined to be a long drawn out one, which is a distinct possibility, as the Bill being now prepared may not have an easy passage before becoming law, if at all.

These unseemly developments bring to mind the old debate of whether the idea of `freedom` has to be predicated by `law and order`. English philosopher Thomas Hobbes spelled it out in the 17th Century that it is the latter which must have primacy, informed as he was by the chaos of the English Civil War during his time. His conclusion was, it does not matter if it was the Parliamentarians or the Royalists who assumed power of the State, but State power must have to legitimately rest only in one of them, an idea later to be expanded by German philosopher Max Weber, when he came up with the notion of `legitimate violence` as a monopoly of the State. This idea also in a way informed the debate within the Communist movement on whether the party or its members should be the ultimate wielder of power. Lenin rightly assessed the Russian situation and opted for the model which gave primacy to the supremacy of a strong, centralised party. Antonio Gramsci in Northern Italy theorised a Communism which gave more sovereign power to the individual, but then his much more literate audience in Italy`™s affluent northern industrial belt had to be addressed differently. In China, this contrast can actually be mapped on a chronological map. Mao, like Lenin correctly opted for the model which made the party supreme and absolutely centralised. But as China grows more affluent and literate in the modern times, the centralised party with absolute power over all individuals is becoming anachronistic and expectedly increasingly questioned in the country itself. Many have predicted that the Chinese Communist Party would now have to transform and rejuvenate to mirror the new character of the people it leads. This debate also was reflected in the comparison between the French and American revolutions, both of which led to democracies in their respective countries, though premised on two radically different presumptions. As Fareed Zakaria surmises in `Future of Freedom`, the American democracy did not trust concentration of power in any individual or institutional hands, therefore built checks and balances into every power structure. French democracy on the other hand, as a legacy of the virtually leaderless French Revolution, trusted the integrity of the individual absolutely and believed the liberal empowering of individuals would automatically lead to a just society. In the 300 years of their existence, the political system in America remained unchanged throughout. The French system on the other hand was much more unstable and changed five times, twice came close to quasi-dictatorships.

Too much power in the hands of the political party can result in authoritarian dictatorships. Too much power in the hands of the plebeian public on the hand can lead to mobocracy. For democracy to prevail and be meaningful, a right mix of the two therefore is vital. At this moment, the current civil movement in Manipur seems to have lost this balance. The party has dissolved into the background, leaving agitating public to define freedom as the license to do anything they please on the streets, causing all the chaos, and damaging the image of the movement itself.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/freedom-and-license/

A solution to the demand for introduction of the Inner Line Permit System, ILPS, continues to be elusive. The government it is known now has prepared several variations of the Bill, but is awaiting consensus before it can be sent up for approval to be introduced in the Assembly. But since its talks with the JCILPS has broken down after two joint sittings, with the latter insisting all the five points it forwarded the government would have to be included in the draft Bill, it is uncertain how this consensus will ever be reached. In an informal meeting with the senior media persons today, the chief minister, Okram Ibobi, said he is wary that with all these five point, the Bill is unlikely to get past the legislative process, as not everything is in the hands of the state government. This is particularly so, he said, because demands 2 and 5 of the JCILPS, one having to do with fixing the cut off year of 1951 to determine who is a permanent resident, and the other pertaining to detection and deportation of non-residents may face insurmountable legal hurdles. Whatever option the government takes, the question which looms is, what if the Governor as the representative of the Union government either keeps the Bill reserved, as he did the earlier withdrawn Bill on the same issue, or else sends it for the President`™s advice, which actually means seeking the Union Cabinet`™s approval? What if this approval is not forthcoming on whatever the ground, legal or nationalistic considerations? These are disturbing thoughts, but ones which everybody must be prepared to ask themselves, so as not to be taken by surprise should the worst case scenario becomes the state`™s fate. At the moment, such a scenario does seem a distinct possibility and in the end, if there is a total collapse of the established order, the emergency measure of President`™s Rule, would probably become inevitable.

We do hope something positive and progressive results out of the current tussle. But in the meantime, we cannot also help looking back on some of the possible solutions many have suggested, including in our own columns. We have also seen how the problem is compounded by the deep fissures on ethnic lines in the state. Hence, one of the solutions that sections of the valley dwellers have suggested, that of seeking Schedule Tribe, ST, status for the Meiteis and Meitei Pangals so that land protection would automatically come for the indigenous populations in the valley too as in the hills, is looked upon with suspicion not just by another section of the valley population who see this as a retrogressive step, but also by a section of the hill population who are already in the ST list, for then the competition for reserved seats in the state government job market would become far stiffer. If this is the only apprehension, there could be a way out. Even if the whole state is declared a tribal state, the state government could still keep the current reservation norms for state government jobs and other entitlements, with 33 per cent seats continued to be reserved for the hill populations. On the national arena, the valley dwellers having access to the 7 per cent reservation in Union government jobs should not worry the state`™s hill tribes, for this would hardly make a dent on what is already available for them.

The other option is to make a draft of the Bill that is perfectly within the bounds of the law of the country so that even if its passage is withheld by any authority, the obstruction can even be challenged in the court of law. And if it is perfectly within the bounds of the law, there is no reason why any authority, be it of the state or the Union, should object to it. Many cases with unquestionable merit are lost because of procedural or technical flaws in their presentation. There can be no doubt that the case for the ILPS is strong. Demographic marginalisation of small communities in the face of unchecked immigration is indeed a real threat. This being the case, close study of the way the case is presented is important. This is also why minute consultations with legal experts are vital before the Bill is pup for scrutiny in the long legislative process. The government as well as the JCILPS, since both have vowed they are interested in a constitutional solution, should independently consult nationally and internationally reputed, and absolutely independent constitutional experts, well versed with Indian laws; their histories; and variants of them that exist across the globe, even if this means considerable expenses. Let us realise that this is not a simple law were are looking at, but one which will have a bearing on the future of generations to come.
Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/is-pr-coming/

It does seem the contentious issue of the introduction of the Inner Line permit system in Manipur is unlikely to end soon. The government has indicated that it will not be able to keep the deadline of a month it set itself to come up with a Bill to the effect and moreover, it has also made it known that there are two clauses amongst the five demands submitted by the JCILPS which are proving thorny. Although these clauses have not been made public, it is reasonable to guess one of these is Clause-2, which has to do with the cut off year of 1951 set to define non-domiciles. The other probably is Clause-5, regarding detection and deportation of illegal migrants and non-indigenous people. The other three, that of issue of permits to migrants; prohibition of sale of landed properties to non-domiciles; and creation of a full-fledged labour department to monitor migrants, should not face much legal hurdles, provided they are approached imaginatively and compassionately.
Our guess is informed by recent history on similar problems faced by Assam during its `Anti-Foreigners Agitation` of the late 1970s and early 1980s, where amongst the many demands of the agitators, the issue of 1951 as cut off year as well as detection and deportation of foreigners, proved impossible to resolve legally. These two clauses are also very closely related and indeed intertwined inseparably. In the Assam case, the cut off year was finally raised to 1971, but even this proved impossible. The question was, and still is, how do you declare as illegal somebody who has voted in an Indian election and therefore had been a fundamental instrument in the constitution of India`™s most important democratic institutions of the Parliament and Assemblies. We do hope there is light at the end of the tunnel, and in the spirit of give and take, the issue is resolved. From our standpoint, we would think that Clause-3, which prohibits land ownership transfers to outsiders is the most important, and ensuring this would resolve most of the others on its own. We need not look any further than our own hill districts which do not share the immigrant worries because hill lands are protected.

If the Assam Agitation is a lesson on the matter, there is also much to learn from the direction the Naga peace negotiation is heading currently. Ostensibly the two most contentious demands, that of sovereignty and integration of Naga territory have been dropped. Unlike what some commentators have claimed, neither of these happened long ago. In a recent interaction, the interlocutor of the negotiation, R.N. Ravi, confirmed it was only in February this year something on the line was agreed upon. Before this date, when the government made its position known that these two were not negotiable, the NSCN(IM) had broken off from the talks, and the negotiations were stalemated on these issues for almost the whole of last year. The words `Indian Constitution` is not mentioned even in the recent `framework agreement`, but in spirit this was amply implied when the consensus was to work for a solution within the `flexible and accommodative framework of the Indian system`. This message was always clear. Union joint secretary home in charge of Northeast, Sambhu Singh, had spelled it out in another situation in a televised interview while the agitation for `Alternative Arrangement` was in full swing. When the interviewer (Vision TV) told him of the threat of the agitators they would not allow government developmental projects in their area, all he said was no government employee would lose his job or salary while the trouble lasted, and only the earmarked development works would suffer.
What the ILPS agitators must keep in mind is, beyond a limit, the Union government can simply turn away. It does not hurt New Delhi that the Imphal streets are burning. As we have seen, even the national media will not keep its focus on the state for long. We must push the matter, which undoubtedly spawns from a very legitimate concern, to the very limit, but we must also know where this limit is, for beyond this limit, we will only be running against a wall. The Assam Agitation and the NSCN(IM) peace talks have demonstrated this loudly before our very eyes.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/the-exile-and-the-kingdom/

Amongst the hints of the shape of the `framework agreement` between the Government of India and the NSCN(IM) signed in New Delhi on August 3 is that there will be no redrawing of the boundaries of existing states of the Northeast neighbouring Nagaland. Another also indicated there will be an administrative autonomy model introduced for Nagas living outside Nagaland, and a structure to ensure cultural unity amongst the various Naga tribes. On the first point, it has further been clarified that the accord will create no power structure which will clash with the authority of the states in these neighbouring states. If these are the correct and honest pictures of what are envisaged, and there is no reason why they would not be, neighbouring states have little to worry. For reasons obvious, Manipur has been the most concerned with the development, wary as it is of the idea of a Greater Nagaland which will dismember it of large chunks of its Naga majority hill districts. These assurances should however allay these concerns to a good extent.

Having said this, it must be agreed that the siege mentality that the Meiteis in the valley suffer from is not without reason. The small valley they are settled in is the only land governed by the modern land revenue laws, and open to settlement by all. An increasing congestion is the result. This should explain why the movement for the Inner Line Permit System, ILPS, is restricted to the valley, while many in the hills have either remained silent, or else dismissively and with airs of ridicule, assess its implications. This siege mentality is also what has led the retrogressive demand of a section of the Meiteis to be classified as Scheduled Tribes, a fact which the hills have, rather than rejoice at the prospect of an expansion of their fraternity, again viewed with apprehension that the latter would come and grab their share of the reservation pie. This is the nature of the hill-valley divide in the state today, and it is too deeply entrenched to be washed away by sermons on ethnic brotherhood and shared indigenous interests.

This being the case, the valley must begin changing its attitude and approach. It must begin thinking in terms of cooperative federalism rather than homogenising the aspirations of the different communities and regions. This will entail first of all for the Meiteis abandoning their arrogant presumption that their interest defines the state`™s interest. However, this should also mean an end to what they have also presumed as the political correct stance of investing all their energy to what they see as ethnic brotherhood of communities in the state, even if they receive little or nothing in return. To seek a certain level of parity however should not be about asking for ST status for themselves. It should on the other hand be about evolving a model by which the playing fields are level at least on their unreserved grounds. But before a possible model of this nature is touched upon, a little more on the autonomy model for the hills, especially with a Naga Accord approaching should be relevant. Let this accord be a success, and it can be a success only if it does not have the potential for harming neighbours.

As long as there are no power structures that will come to clash with the authority of the state, let an autonomy model, 6th Schedule or newer, be given to the hills, although the 6th Schedule was originally meant for pockets of tribal lands in demographically and territorially much larger Assam. Mizoram abolished it when it was separated from Assam to ultimately become a full-fledged state, and retailed it only in three tiny pockets where minuscule ethic communities who did not want to adopt the newly constructed Mizo identity lived. In Meghalaya strangely, the 6th Schedule was retained even after it was separated from Assam and reorganised as a separate state so that almost the entire state, except the capital region of Shillong, overlaps with three 6th Schedule ADCs. This, as reports suggest, has been the cause of many small administrative irritants but never one capable of threatening the existence of the state. So Manipur should not worry too much. Manipur needs not worry too much on the suggestion of a structure for cultural integration for the Nagas too, for this is already very much a reality even today. For instance all Naga students bodies in Manipur are affiliated to the Naga Students Federation, NSF, and all apex Naga tribal bodies are affiliated to the Naga Hoho.

But if the hills are give further autonomy than they already have, in all fairness and administrative prudence, the valley too must be given something. A model that refers back to the logic by which the 6th Schedule was conceived of when it was being framed, and the definition of tribal as communities living by their tradition mores and economies, whose land holdings are determined by customary laws etc, could be the cue. The Canadian model, although the situation is vastly different in that Native Americans had been robbed of their lands and their populations decimated by systematic genocide, could be useful. Natives who lived in `Reservations`, are entitled to state provided facilities for tribals, but not those who live and work, or have acquired properties in non-reserved lands as any other ordinary citizens of the country. In the Manipur context, this could be about all who settle and acquired landed properties in the valley having to forsake reservation facilities, although every one of them obviously would retain his or her ethnic identity intact. This will not only give a sense of a measure of protection to the insecure non-tribal Meiteis, but also ensure reservation facilities went to only those who deserve them amongst those in the ST list living in the 6th Schedule areas.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/accord-and-autonomy/

Of all the athletics feats in history, the one accomplished by Roger Bannister on May 6, 1954 at Oxford University`™s Iffley Road Track, is considered the greatest. Bannister`™s keen rivalry with Australian John Landy, another mile runner, also the most romantic. Bannister ran the mile for the first time in human history under four minutes, a barrier many at the time thought was the absolute limit of human capability. Bannister had an able competitor in another young man, John Landy in chasing this record thought to be unbreakable. When everybody had come to believe they were fighting for a lost cause, it happened at Oxford. Aided by two pace setters, Bannister crossed the finish line in 3 minutes 59.4 seconds, just one sixth of a second short of four minutes. It was a moment for the world to celebrate. A barrier that none believed any human could cross was breached. If the event itself triggered euphoria, what followed was even more amazing. Nearly halfway around the world, just six weeks after Bannister did it, John Landy also accomplished the feat, completing the distance in 3 minutes 57.9 seconds, chipping off 1.5 seconds more from the record set by Bannister.

What made Landy suddenly able to do it after hearing of Bannister`™s achievement is the interesting question. Unlike Bannister, he did not need any pace setters to achieve the feat. In today`™s extremely competitive environment, using a pace setter would have put a cloud on records thus broken. Pace setters are fellow runners who are not in the competition for the top spot but who merely run ahead of the man meant to break the record for some time to make him chase them and then drop out. Bannister`™s record, although great, was still in the strict sense of the world, a team effort of three runners in which he took the lead role. All the same, nobody can deny the greatness of his feat. Moreover, Bannister beat Landy in a meet in Vancouver in August 1954 in which both ran sub-four-minute miles. The moot point is, the breach created by Bannister and later by Landy, ultimately resulted in a dam burst with runners after runners, from Steve Ovett to Sebastian Coe to Steve Cram to Noureddine Morceli to a whole stable of the finest mile runners, either emulating the record or else bettering it. Today the mile record stands at an incredible 3 minutes 43.13 seconds set in Rome in 1999 by Moroccan Hicham El Guerrouj. American Steve Scott has also created a record of his own, having run the mile under four minutes 136 times in his career. They too have a lot to thank Bannister for opening up the road ahead of them. The Bannister story has subsequently been repeated in many other disciplines where human limit had seemed to have been reached. To name just two, the incredible long jump record by Bob Beamon, the sub 10 second 100 meters sprint by Jim Hines, both set at the 1968 Mexico Olympics, have all been relegated to history.

The obvious inference is, many of the hurdles and barriers before human goals, although may appear to be physical and insurmountable, often turn out to be more psychological. Just the knowledge and conviction that a goal is achievable can transform human endurance, approach and indeed capability. Which is perhaps why pioneers have a great role in charting the course for any society. The issue comes to mind in the event of some candidates from the state making it through the UPSC conducted recruitment test for the top Central government services, including the IAS and the IPS. For a middle class society like Manipur, the middle class dream of getting into the government services remains predominant and no dream has been as big as getting into the IAS. Although there have been some major consolations that some in the reserved categories have been entering these services, amongst the state`™s general category candidates, there still seems to be a mind block preventing them from going the extra distance and achieve the goal. Few now and then have made it, but they have been exceptions rather than rule. Our prayer and hope is, a breach has been created in the psychological barrier that had prevented candidates, many of them brilliant, from making it into these services. And just as Bannister and Landy did, we do hope the breach results in a dam burst, so that the place can actually begin dreaming beyond this middle class dream and reach for the sky without a sense of `sour grapes`.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/mind-barriers/

In the wake of the recent historic `Naga Accord` or now more accurately known as the `framework agreement` between the leaders of the NSCN(IM) and the Government of India, quite understandably the issue of the Merger Agreement signed on September 21, 1949 between Manipur`™s then king Bodhachandra and the Government of India, and enacted from October 15, 1949, is coming up for discussion on various internet forums. The farcical emptiness of the Manipur Merger Agreement, as it virtually contains no issue of gravity pertaining to the political status or economic welfare of the former princely state of Manipur, is among the focus of these resurfacing discussions. The king is often blamed and ridiculed for the frivolous nature of the agreement, but it must be recalled that the king had pleaded with the Government of India representative, Assam Governor Sri Prakasa and his assistant Nari Rushtomji, that he be allowed to return to Manipur and consult his government, which by then was an elected one, and his people. He also pledged that he only wanted this prior consultation and that he would not renege on his promise to sign the merger agreement. This request however was not granted. This is not surprising, for India`™s then Deputy Prime Minister also in charge of the Home portfolio, Sardar Vallabhai Patel, who was already critically ill by then, and whom the government negotiators met earlier, was in a hurry to settle India`™s incomplete territory consolidation issue, and would have no further delays in having Manipur and Tripura merge with India. When he was told Manipur was posing a problem, he is famously is known to have said, `Don`™t we have a brigadier in Shillong` (Nari Rushtomji in `Imperilled Frontier`).

It is everybody`™s knowledge now that king Bodhchandra was coerced into signing the Merger Agreement after being held under house arrest at the Redlands, his beautiful estate bungalow in picturesque Laitumkhra area of Shillong, and now the Manipur House under the care of the Manipur Government, where he had gone for some work. After resisting it for four days he finally put his signature on a hurriedly drawn document on September 21. Much water has flowed down the many rivers of Manipur and the Northeast ever since and there is now hardly any point in decrying the manner in which the treaty was signed or seeking its reversal. However, certain things which are grossly unfair in the treaty can be and should be rectified, not necessarily by a renegotiation of the same treaty, but by a subsequent treaty that overrides the earlier. Consider this point. The king had less than four days to negotiate the 1949 treaty a good part of which was spent resisting the proposal, assisted only by his private secretary, S. Gourahari, (Haobam Bhuban: `The Merger of Manipur`). This brevity of deadline and the paucity of consultants and counsels made available to the king, has become stark now when we see that it took nearly 18 years for the Government of India to negotiate a `framework agreement` with the NSCN(IM), assisted as we now know by very reputed constitutional experts from The Netherlands, America and Kenya. Even then, it is still not sure how many more years it would be before a conclusive accord can be reached.

Even if it cannot anymore be said the Manipur Merger Agreement 1949 was illegal, from the moral standpoint at least, it is clear from the text of the document how unfair it was for Manipur. It is time therefore for another more comprehensive, more consensual, more informed, and absolutely coercion free treaty to supersede it. We do hope, in the not so distant future, such a treaty which has the welfare of the land and its people, comes to be negotiated and settled. But the society is much more complex now than what it was seven decades ago. If and when such a settlement does come about, it will have to be in perfect consonance with the ethos of the entirety of the state, but of the whole Northeast region and beyond as well. Only the peace brought about by such a regional understanding and cooperation can be conclusive and lasting.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/remedies-for-merger-ills/

It needed someone like Rajdeep Sardesai to say it. Manipur`™s reaction to the slow displacement of its indigenous population, not just in terms of numbers, but more importantly in terms of economic and political power, is not without legitimacy. Like it or not, the trouble that Manipur witnessed, following the tragic death of schoolboy Sapam Robinhood, 16, was brewing for a long time. If the tragic death had not happened, maybe the explosion of public sentiment would have been delayed, but not forever. Someday or the other, what the state is witnessing today, was destined to happen in any case. There were apparently some intelligence reports that the entire trouble was at the instigation of an underground group, but this is at best only a small part of the story. In fact any militant group would be happy at the allegation, and probably would hope that it was true, for they would quite understandably be craving to be actually at the command of such a tidal wave of emotions. No it could not have been the case. No single organisation could have and still would not be able to either inspire or keep such a spontaneous overflow of public energy under their control.

As also was witnessed during the peak of the agitations, things did seem to spin out of control. Doctors on emergency service, journalists on duty, patients rushing to the hospitals were being stopped and harangued. There were even reports that wedding car cavalcades were stopped and occupants made to climb out of vehicles and walk across barricades. It will also be recalled how the media in Imphal, as per a joint decision of the Editors`™ Forum Manipur, EFM, and the All Manipur Working Journalists Union, AMWJU, stopped publication for one day, though after making it absolutely sure that no wrong message was sent out, and that the symbolic closure was prompted by desperation, and not by any means a protest against the movement. This notwithstanding, there have been a lot of aspersions cast on the integrity of the media from many quarters who absolutely have no knowledge what it means to be on the fields on duty, especially at night during those days. If reporters had some means and excuses to get past the many barricades, the machine and computer staff who are equally indispensable in the newspaper production process, found it impossible to come to or return from their offices. The passions behind the agitation were tremendous, but the manner in which it tended to go out of control should disturb everybody.

We say it is needed for a credible voice from what is considered mainstream India to articulate all these for one reason. On matters of nationally sensitive issues like immigration policy, voices emanating from regions considered peripheral to the mainstream are always viewed with a measure of distrust and suspicion. For example, to write of the accumulated resentments of locals at their being slowly but surely pushed to the margins of the economy of their own land because the handles of business and commerce have been very visibly shifting out of their hands to those of successive generations of settlers, would have been seen as biased and parochial. The writers themselves, from an understanding and anticipation of this judgment would have self-censored and sanitised their own viewpoints to make them not offensive to what they see to be mainstream sense of propriety. This is however a problem not just of journalists, it is very much true of politics too in much of the Northeast states. Politicians here know and indeed have been made to feel how much they are dependent on the charity of the Centre for their survival and how insignificant they are when they are pitted against the Centre, so much so that the policies they frame have come to be largely determined by what they believe would please the Centre. If not this than at least they would by intuition, refrain from doing what they believe would go against what they believe is mainstream. Killed in the process are political imagination, inventiveness and initiative that only autonomy of vision can give. Indeed, as many would vouch, one of the biggest inhibitors before local academics and journalists of the Northeast in articulating the problems of the region has been about how to empathetically understand and represent popular movements in their region. For the `subject analyst`, to honestly do so would be to risk being seen as parochial, and in extreme cases, anti-national. But doing so is also essential in sizing up these problems and paving the way for honest remedies. It is a peculiar situation in which honest opinions are doomed to remain silent and unclaimed, therefore perpetuating dishonest portrayal of the situation on the ground. This is why, forthright opinions of credible dispassionate outsider voices, such as those of Sardesai recently, are often a breath of fresh air to break this oppressive but unseen cloak that keep the raw truth from coming to the fore.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/cloaked-honest-opinions/

In these trying times before Manipur, it is difficult not to be reminded of how physicist turned philosopher, Karl Popper, characterised the idea of problem solving. In `All Life is Problem Solving` (Routlege Classic series) a collection of his own essays on issues related to problem solving, an essay which has the same title as the book is particularly interesting in the context of this discussion. He says life, and therefore survival, in the ultimately analysis is about problem solving. This naturally entails, first correctly identifying and diagnosing the problem, and then thinking of a strategy to get past it. All life forms, from the time they came into being, have been following this strategy, of course with widely varying sophistications. This being the case, a simple single cell being like the amoeba and the most evolved brain, and Popper uses the example of Einstein, have employed this survival mantra through their lives. However, the differences in the way they have refined their approaches, as Popper explains, is fascinating and eye opening. Amoebas act purely by instinct. They solve their problems by trials and errors. Whenever it runs into a problem, it and many more of its kind will run continue to run into the problem and perish until by chance one among them discovers a new route to avoid the problem. This new route will then be followed until another problem comes their way, and then the whole exercise will be repeated. There is a good chance they all will perish if their trial and error strategy is unable to discover a new solution soon enough. This is also very much the problem solving strategy of much of the animal world. But things change when it comes to higher primates and other intelligent beings.

So what would humans (Einstein) do, Popper muses. Unlike the amoeba, intelligent life, in particular humans, do not make themselves part of their problem solving experiments. If an experiment fails, it is only the experiment which is discarded, but the experimenter does not perish. This can of course also cross ethical limits, and humans can and have used other life forms to conduct their experiments, and in extreme cases, privileged humans in positions of power have used others of their same kind lower down on the privilege hierarchy as experimental guinea pigs. But even without resorting to such extremes, humans generally solve problems differently. Not just would he avoid his person being part of the experiment, the most progressive would also generally not wait for the next problem to appear. He would instead try and anticipate the problem and therefore its solution too. This entails the capacity to be self-critical. As Popper illustrates it, Einstein would strive to come with a solution to a difficult problem, but after he has discovered it, he would not rest even if his theory has been put in to practice and confirmed as working. He would begin looking for faults in his own theory or even to discredit it, until he discovers other ways of getting past the problem, some even better than what are already available. This way, the best minds, and the best survivors, always have managed to keep ahead of problems. The other inference is, in any problem solving efforts, it is never helpful to look to dead symbols as props for the present problem solving efforts. Looking forward to new solutions is the only way.

If this is true for individuals, it works for societies too. A problem solving plan and its execution must never be treated as identical. A plan must precede its execution for disasters to be avoided in the event of setbacks or even an eventual failure of the plan. Again, a plan must remain open to scrutiny always, even to be discarded and changed if the need arises, if it is discovered the goal can be better achieved through alternate means. In fact, in the battlefields as well as on the sporting fields, the best commanders and coaches always keep many layers of alternate plans ready for quick switches depending on the changes in the battle scenario before them. For this, the ability to be self-critical and the acceptance that nobody and no plan is infallible is crucial. Not only this, the ability must be also to take critical reviews from others, and to learn from them. In the end, the qualities that matter would also be resilience and accommodation, rather than obduracy, blind to unfolding and changing realities.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/problem-solving/

One of the most magnanimous gifts that a society blessed with a sense of confident and of security is generosity of spirit. Peace would prevail in such a society too. From all indices, Manipur at one point in its history seemed such a society. One of these indices is the demographic makeup of Manipur. The place does not have a homogenous population, but all owe allegiance to their common homeland. But to go away from the larger canvas of the whole state, even amongst any single community, for instance the majority Meiteis, as we had suggested before in these same columns, if a genome study were to be done, it would be discovered how varied the ancestry of this same ethnic group are. Even during recorded historical time, we know this has been the case, and the kings have always encouraged naturalisation and assimilation of settlers, and within a few generations they would be indigenised. In King Khagemba`™s time the story of the Pangal (Muslim) invasion from East Bengal in 1606 is well known. The defeated Muslim army was allowed to settle, take local wives and given Meitei surnames to ultimately indigenise. The leniency of course had also to do with the new agricultural and fishing skills the Pangals brought in, falling in the broad pattern of the general outlook of Zomia in matters of skill acquisition that Yale professor, James Scott picturized. Similarly, in the early 18th century, the Brahmins missionaries (Bamon) also were absorbed into the Meitei society. Predetermined by its geography, the Imphal valley would have been a melting pot of ethnicities. The Meiteis themselves, as we know, were formed by the assimilation of seven ethnicities (clans). But the assimilation process did not end there. We also know how many Meitei surnames are distant relations of different hill tribes too. And no doubt about it the society is all the richer for this.

If immigration is controlled and regulated to the extent the society can absorb without detriment to itself, there should be no objection to it. And as we also again already observed in an earlier editorial, those campaigning for the introduction of a regulatory mechanism should keep this in mind, and classify immigrants into two broad categories. In the first category are those who would end up as colonisers becoming the masters of the place`™s resources and displacing the original populations. In the other would be those who would assimilate and be part of the collective milieu of the place, unreservedly placing their loyalties to the place of their settlement. The pleas of the local Telis and local Nepalis etc, must therefore not fall on deaf ears. We can also look at how societies which have had similar policy outlooks progressed phenomenally. The story of Singapore which completed half a century of independence earlier this year, is a case in point. Its founder president, Lee Kwan Yew, actively encouraged immigrants, especially those who were skilled, to be assimilated into the Singapore society, and undertook social engineering projects to ensure peaceful, productive co-existence. This generosity of spirit, as Singapore has demonstrated, is not just a matter of ethics and morality, but also of prudent visionary economics and politics. The other case would be America of the 20th Century, and the immigration policy of the time. We are not of course talking of the White colonisation of the earlier centuries and the genocide of the Native Americans. In fact, there have been volumes written how the 20th Century is considered the American century precisely because of its immigration policy. Behind a good majority of the business and scientific innovations of the century that America boast of today, including the Atom bomb, were naturalised immigrants.

The ILP or an equivalent is necessary, but there must be qualifications. It must not be about shutting all doors and windows, but of regulation to ensure the indigenous societies can accommodate settlers to their benefit. It is a fine line that must be drawn, and provided the existential logic behind such a line is well argued out, there is no reason why the state as well as the Union governments would not agree to the proposal. What the society must also be wary of is that it cannot always be swimming against the tides of the time, and therefore must be resilient enough to adopt and flow with the epochal currents. In a discussion, a Naga gentleman many in Manipur are familiar with, Niketu Iralu, who has been places, including New Zealand to study the issues of indigenous peoples, said there is only one pure blooded Maori left in this world today and he met him. But the Maori identity is still alive and vibrant, and no one dares tell those calling themselves Maoris today, be they blue eyed or fair skinned, they are not Maori. Identity is also about believing in being owned by an identity, and not just about genes.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/room-for-naturalisation/

The laments of chief minister Okram Ibobi two days ago and by Congress president, Sonia Gandhi on how Congress states in the Northeast neighbouring Nagaland were being kept in the dark about the historic Naga Accord signed on August 3 and announced with fanfare by the Prime Minister, Narendra Modi himself, ought to be given serious ear. This is despite the fact that it is not just the BJP government at the Centre which is doing it, for all the other governments at the Centre ever since the ceasefire with the dominant Naga underground group NSCN(IM) began in 1997 have also done it. Again while it is true all the three states neighbouring Nagaland, namely Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh, are all ruled by the Congress party, it may not be true the BJP government at the Centre was consciously targeting them, for the NPF government in Nagaland had all the while had also been ignored on the matter of these peace negotiations. Surely the Centre is not saying the NSCN(IM) is more important than these state governments? This is however not to say the achievement was not historic. It was and it deserves to succeed, though as is known now, at this moment the document signed was merely a `framework agreement`, and not conclusive at all on its content.

When the negotiations first began, maybe the secrecy had a definite purpose for indeed a running commentary of every step taken in important government policy pursuit has in history proven very counterproductive, and indeed derailed important projects. The most prominent example of such a derailment in the Indian context is the Indo-China boundary negotiations on the eve of the 1962 war. As writers now point out, (including Neville Maxwell in his controversial book `India`™s China War), Nehru was under a siege by the opposition, the Indian press, as well as the hardliners within his own party that he was making secret deals with Chou En Lai and selling India`™s interest to China. These allegations began gaining grounds ever since China`™s invasion and occupation of Tibet in 1950 and Nehru`™s feeble protest against it, but escalated to a feverish pitch when it was discovered in 1956 that China had built the Sinkiang-Tibet highway through the Aksai Chin. This discovery was not long after Nehru signed the Pancheel Agreement with China in 1954. Quite tellingly, India came to know of the highway only when its ambassador to China noticed the announcement of the completion of the highway in a Peking newspaper. But ever since, the heat was on Nehru and his `Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai` policy. He ultimately ended up intimidated, prompting him to nervously make public all his policies and every single correspondence with Chou En Lai public either in the Parliament or through the increasingly hostile media. This annoyed China and also made it less and less open, contends many of these scholars. Two conclusions are clear from this. One, the allegation that it was Nehru alone who blundered in the China policy is not true. The Opposition as well as the Indian media were partners in pushing the country to the 1962 catastrophe. Second, it also demonstrates that making sensitive government policies public while still in the process of their evolution is not always wise.

But this logic would not hold if any sensitive policy evolution extends almost two decades for it would end up arousing suspicions and distrusts among all the people with a stake in the issue. Probably the Government of India never anticipated that its peace negotiations with the NSCN(IM) would take so long to fructify. Now that this is inordinate delay is turning out to be the reality, it is time for the Government of India to begin taking the Northeast states with a stake on the matter into confidence to some extent. As per the official clarifications, including by Union minister of state for home affairs, Kiren Rijiju, that there will be no question of redrawing the boundaries of the Northeastern states or hurting the interest of any one of them in making this deal. If this is so, we wonder where would have been the harm in keeping the state governments of Manipur, Nagaland, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh, in the loop on the momentous development. Such a move would have done immense good in assuaging the apprehension and well as distrust of the Union government not only amongst these state governments, but their populations as well. There should have been no necessity to put any of these state governments in an embarrassing situation either, as indeed it would have been for them quite understandably. Imagine important decisions on matters of these states being taken by the Union government without their knowledge. A rhetorical question may make this clearer. Would the Centre have been able to do what it did if it involved a state like Tamil Nadu or West Bengal?

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/ne-states-ignored-again/

The new Naga Peace Accord, it is now clear, was only an important agreement on a commonly agreed route map to a future settlement, or `framework agreement` as officials now describe it as, and therefore there is nothing final about it. It is also unlikely this final settlement is already within grasp. For the reasons that we pointed out in our editorial yesterday, the way ahead is still uphill, and the probably what prompted the hurry was the critical illness of Chairman Isak Chishi Swu. As we see it, this was a symbolic gesture to show that if a closure to the issue is not possible as yet, at least an assurance had to be given that such an end can be reached, even as evening begins to wane and night begins to advance on the lives of the aging top NSCN(IM) leadership duo of Isak Swu and Th. Muivah. In a rather poignant way, the hurried signing of an agreement that only said the negotiations would continue on, is also an indicator that the negotiators believe there are still difficult miles ahead before a final accord can be reached. Hopefully, this is not absolutely so, and a lasting solution acceptable to all, not just the Nagas, but also all with a stake in a happy conclusion to the Naga issue, is the final outcome while the NSCN(IM) patriarchs are still around.

This last point is important. Why must a solution to the Naga problem have elements that must worry Manipur or Assam or Arunachal Pradesh, as it must be admitted has been the case? The answer is quite obvious. No conflict, or solution to it, can happen in a vacuum. Everything and everybody living in any particular geographical region are so interrelated that what one does will have a bearing on the other. Unfortunately, this is a lesson not many are willing to learn, and here we are not referring to any community in particular. This has been the character trait of practically everybody in this region. The conceit of self-importance has made each community think their individual problems can be resolved in isolation, and this is despite the fact that time and again it has been proven how wrong this approach is. In Manipur for instance, as much as the problems of the hill communities cannot be solved in isolation, the valley communities must begin seeing how wrong it is for them to presume their concerns are the state`™s concern as a whole. The ILPS agitation is proving this right before everybody`™s eyes. It is not that the hills do not share the concerns of migrant influx, but quite legitimately, they do not feel this as much of a big threat for them as the valley communities perceive it to be, precisely because the hill lands are protected by law from being taken over, therefore few or no outsider will ever think of permanent residence there. This is why consensus is important. If at all some issues are to be treated as localised, it too should be by mutual understanding. As for instance, it would be difficult to convince the hills of flood threats just as the valley would not see landslides as life threatening as much as the hills do. But even these seemingly different issues are interrelated. The soil erosion in the hills because of deforestation which is making life more and more difficult in the hills, also results in siltation in the rivers and lakes in the valley, making them progressively shallow, and therefore prone to overflow their banks during the monsoons.

The `framework agreement` reached yesterday, therefore must broaden its scope to not just think of a solution of the Naga problem in isolation, if not for anything else, then because such an approach will not work. It must take care that the concerns of all others who would be affected by it are also taken on board. Again to take the example of Manipur, it must not leave the Meiteis in the valley, or the Kukis who share the hills as homeland with the Nagas, feeling they have been wronged. As we have always insisted, a zero sum game can never bring lasting solution. What we all must await and look forward to is a consensual agreement forged by all stakeholders, in which every party stands to gain without unfair costs inflicted on any other. By definition, true peace is precisely this for intuitively everybody knows there is nobody who would not benefit from a comprehensive peace. The trouble is, very often, the kind of peace sought in the Northeast`™s sordid theatres of conflict are just the opposite, and therefore the conclusion one conflict often ends up triggering off other chains of conflicts.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/08/comprehensive-peace/