By H Kham Khan Suan
There is a grain of truth in the new General Officer Commander-in-Chief (Eastern Command), Lt.-Gen. Arvind Sharma’s contention in a press conference that the Army would be reduced to a “reactive force” without the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, better known as AFSPA.
Notwithstanding innumerable odds and misgivings a plausible alternative to this draconian Act, in place in different parts of the region since 1958, is difficult to come by. Evidently, the Indian State in tackling the “durable disorder” – to use Sanjib Baruah’s verbiage – is under tremendous stress, as never before, to help erode its proactive role to enforce “law and order” in this part of the country. This stark reality becomes glaringly evident even as the Review Committee on AFSPA recently concluded a series of confabulations and hearings in the region and in New Delhi between December 2004 and February 2005.
The stand taken by various NGOs and human rights organisations – Apunba Lup, Naga People’s Movement for Human Rights, Zomi Human Rights Foundation, to name a few – that the Act be repealed in toto bespeaks of the enormously complex issues involved.
In essence, the narrative of “law and order” – and the paraphernalia of coercive instruments it employs – in this part of the country is steeped in the discourse on national integration. The project of national integration, with “nationalism without a nation” (to borrow G Aloysius) as its modus operandi, was hit soon after the prospect of Independence became imminent.
Subsequently, the controversy that surrounds incorporation of the north-eastern states, particularly Manipur, into India wherein the minor regent, Boddhichandra, was “coerced” to sign the Merger Agreement in 1949 remains a nagging constitutional conundrum. As a corollary, the presence of any Indian State apparatus becomes a suspect.
It is in this light that what we witnessed in the summer of 2004 may just be seen as a “spark” of a fire (of nationalism or sub-nationalism as some would simplistically have it) brewing up and enveloping most of India’s borderlands. Such a spark may at times prove difficult to bury in the public imagination. It calls for sustained and comprehensive redressal.
No one can forget the events which inspired the naked protest by otherwise conservative Meitei women on 15 July 2004 in front of Kangla Fort – the base of the Assam Rifles and a symbol of “sub-national” pride. The “spark” was the death of Manorama Devi in AR custody following her detention on suspicion of being a cadre of the Peoples Liberation Army. These episodes suggested the extent to which a “patriotic act” by a committed few can weave together seemingly disparate communities into a solidified front of people fighting for rights and dignity. No democratic state can afford to ignore the gravity of such a situation.
It is precisely here that the assiduous efforts of the Review Committee to hold comprehensive consultations have to be appreciated. This assumes greater urgency in a situation marked by pronounced asymmetrical obligations among unequals (armed state vis-à-vis haplessly dispersed communities) where the sanctity and indivisibility of ethno-territorial boundaries attains greater importance. What is at stake is to rethink the whole edifice of national policy on North-East India. In a way, attempts to reconcile the demands to keep the armed forces within the confines of democratic control with the need to utilise them to maintain the unity and integrity of the nation require unpopular decisions which few political elites dare to take.
Therefore, the Review Committee should, inter alia, seriously consider the following issues:
1. Sensitise the existing military training posts in several parts of North-east India on human rights. The extant posts, without extra deployment of Central/paramilitary forces, would suffice the need of any exigency provided they are well equipped and trained.
2. Help evolve core groups within these posts to be readily available on demand. These groups may be drawn from communities which do not have any local allegiance. This is imperative amidst persistent complaints that elements within the armed forces, dispatched to carry out anti-insurgency operations, often have resorted to arson and unwarranted crimes.
3. Evolve means and ways to capitalise upon the fast disappearing mismatch between civil society and the State and help build, strengthen and foster civil societies. Towards this end help evolve innovative, prudent and effective use of mass media to channelise protests.
4. Streamline this mobilisation/consciousness to achieving broad-based participatory democracy. Integrally linked with this is an imperative to involve, engage and strengthen traditional/local institutions so that their time-tested efficacy is harnessed to help manage conflict. This assumes greater urgency in the face of a propensity to disown and marginalise such institutions. Herein lies the significance of having intense intra and inter community involvement and rapprochements.
All this would inevitably demand concerted political efforts and solutions. In effect, the disorder in the North-east desperately needs a holistic approach which privileges discursive democratic practices without necessarily sacrificing the “proactive” role of the armed forces in the process of national integration.
(The author teaches political science at Benaras Hindu University, Varanasi)
[The article had been published in the Statesman (New Delhi), 7 February 2005 and reproduced with the author's consent].
www.zogam.com
There is a grain of truth in the new General Officer Commander-in-Chief (Eastern Command), Lt.-Gen. Arvind Sharma’s contention in a press conference that the Army would be reduced to a “reactive force” without the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, better known as AFSPA.
Notwithstanding innumerable odds and misgivings a plausible alternative to this draconian Act, in place in different parts of the region since 1958, is difficult to come by. Evidently, the Indian State in tackling the “durable disorder” – to use Sanjib Baruah’s verbiage – is under tremendous stress, as never before, to help erode its proactive role to enforce “law and order” in this part of the country. This stark reality becomes glaringly evident even as the Review Committee on AFSPA recently concluded a series of confabulations and hearings in the region and in New Delhi between December 2004 and February 2005.
The stand taken by various NGOs and human rights organisations – Apunba Lup, Naga People’s Movement for Human Rights, Zomi Human Rights Foundation, to name a few – that the Act be repealed in toto bespeaks of the enormously complex issues involved.
In essence, the narrative of “law and order” – and the paraphernalia of coercive instruments it employs – in this part of the country is steeped in the discourse on national integration. The project of national integration, with “nationalism without a nation” (to borrow G Aloysius) as its modus operandi, was hit soon after the prospect of Independence became imminent.
Subsequently, the controversy that surrounds incorporation of the north-eastern states, particularly Manipur, into India wherein the minor regent, Boddhichandra, was “coerced” to sign the Merger Agreement in 1949 remains a nagging constitutional conundrum. As a corollary, the presence of any Indian State apparatus becomes a suspect.
It is in this light that what we witnessed in the summer of 2004 may just be seen as a “spark” of a fire (of nationalism or sub-nationalism as some would simplistically have it) brewing up and enveloping most of India’s borderlands. Such a spark may at times prove difficult to bury in the public imagination. It calls for sustained and comprehensive redressal.
No one can forget the events which inspired the naked protest by otherwise conservative Meitei women on 15 July 2004 in front of Kangla Fort – the base of the Assam Rifles and a symbol of “sub-national” pride. The “spark” was the death of Manorama Devi in AR custody following her detention on suspicion of being a cadre of the Peoples Liberation Army. These episodes suggested the extent to which a “patriotic act” by a committed few can weave together seemingly disparate communities into a solidified front of people fighting for rights and dignity. No democratic state can afford to ignore the gravity of such a situation.
It is precisely here that the assiduous efforts of the Review Committee to hold comprehensive consultations have to be appreciated. This assumes greater urgency in a situation marked by pronounced asymmetrical obligations among unequals (armed state vis-à-vis haplessly dispersed communities) where the sanctity and indivisibility of ethno-territorial boundaries attains greater importance. What is at stake is to rethink the whole edifice of national policy on North-East India. In a way, attempts to reconcile the demands to keep the armed forces within the confines of democratic control with the need to utilise them to maintain the unity and integrity of the nation require unpopular decisions which few political elites dare to take.
Therefore, the Review Committee should, inter alia, seriously consider the following issues:
1. Sensitise the existing military training posts in several parts of North-east India on human rights. The extant posts, without extra deployment of Central/paramilitary forces, would suffice the need of any exigency provided they are well equipped and trained.
2. Help evolve core groups within these posts to be readily available on demand. These groups may be drawn from communities which do not have any local allegiance. This is imperative amidst persistent complaints that elements within the armed forces, dispatched to carry out anti-insurgency operations, often have resorted to arson and unwarranted crimes.
3. Evolve means and ways to capitalise upon the fast disappearing mismatch between civil society and the State and help build, strengthen and foster civil societies. Towards this end help evolve innovative, prudent and effective use of mass media to channelise protests.
4. Streamline this mobilisation/consciousness to achieving broad-based participatory democracy. Integrally linked with this is an imperative to involve, engage and strengthen traditional/local institutions so that their time-tested efficacy is harnessed to help manage conflict. This assumes greater urgency in the face of a propensity to disown and marginalise such institutions. Herein lies the significance of having intense intra and inter community involvement and rapprochements.
All this would inevitably demand concerted political efforts and solutions. In effect, the disorder in the North-east desperately needs a holistic approach which privileges discursive democratic practices without necessarily sacrificing the “proactive” role of the armed forces in the process of national integration.
(The author teaches political science at Benaras Hindu University, Varanasi)
[The article had been published in the Statesman (New Delhi), 7 February 2005 and reproduced with the author's consent].
www.zogam.com
No comments:
Post a Comment