Imphal Free Press Editorial
Civilians to Combatants:
Heirok and Lilong Chajing, are two immediate demonstrations that legitimacy of the establishment, or more pertinently its challengers, cannot be sustained by appeals to nationalism alone, whatever hue that nationalism is of. In the end, the only lasting legitimacy of any establishment or its challengers will rest on the ability to qualify these legitimacy appeals with actual guarantees of quality of life. So if arbitrary executions, detention, intimidations, murders by mistake, etc, are sought to be justified in the name of upholding nationalism, or dismissed as collateral damage in this war, the only casualty ultimately would be the awe with which the same brand of nationalism is held by the public. Interestingly, it is Manipur more than anywhere else, which has seen the public saying no to these “nationalistic” atrocities regardless of which side of the battlefront the atrocities are committed by. In this sense, it would not be very wrong to say that the show of public outrage at the sudden spurt of midnight knocks followed by executions in 2004, the final victim being Thangjam Manorama, marked by the naked protest in front of the Kangla while it was still occupied by the Assam Rifles, and the defiant stance at Heirok and Lilong Chajing today, where the public are actually ready to go to war over unwarranted killings, tell the same story. What we are witnessed to in either case is plain and raw public anger on display. This should explain our reservation on the Manipur government’s response in the present case. The question is whether any government is warranted to give official sanction to expressions of raw public anger, however justified that anger is, instead of attempting to channel the same outrage into established institutional expressions. Wouldn’t this amount to a return to medieval justice, where public stoning to death, lynching, maiming etc, had official sanction? The lesson, we must add, is for both the establishment, as much for those who are fighting to wrest control of the establishment.
The Manipur government’s decision to arm the willing amongst its civil population is not altogether without precedence though. The experiment is currently being carried out in Chhattisgarh to combat the rising threat of Maoist insurgency. Much before this, and nowhere else than in Manipur, was witnessed another incarnation of the same policy in the shape of the Village Voluntary Force, VVF, founded by none other than a towering figure, Major Bob Khathing, a highly decorated soldier and administrator in British India as well as independent India, and a minister in the first Manipur cabinet, while it was still a sovereign state when the Manipur constitution came into force and the kingdom transitioned into a constitutional monarchy. Major Khathing’s VVF was founded to resist the Japanese onslaught into Ukhrul district from Burma during the World War II, and leading from the front he demonstrated how potent the force can be. The VVF survived long after the war and were again put into action during the heights of Naga insurrection. While the force was known as VVF in the Manipur hills, it was named Village Guards, VG, in the erstwhile Naga Hill district of Assam. Most of the VVF volunteers in later years were to be absorbed into the SSB. Although the VVF’s role in these projects is known (www.manipurpolice.org), it is arguable if it has been of any help in bringing about a final resolution, considering that insurrections in Nagaland and Manipur are still far from over. The extent to which violence and militarization have taken roots in the Naga society is also for anybody to see.
Beyond the ethics of the development, there is another complication obfuscating the debate. This new war has an added incentive. In one go, 500 low salary (not so by Manipur market standard) jobs have been created, and in a job famished state, it will not be a surprise at all if there are more villages in the future clamouring for the benefits of the new policy to be extended to them as well. Much of the outrage such as those seen in Heirok and Lilong would then have acquired a mercenary hue. The depth to which violence would have sunk into the soul of the place is for anybody to imagine. The distinction between combatants and civilians too would have considerably blurred.
Heirok and Lilong Chajing, are two immediate demonstrations that legitimacy of the establishment, or more pertinently its challengers, cannot be sustained by appeals to nationalism alone, whatever hue that nationalism is of. In the end, the only lasting legitimacy of any establishment or its challengers will rest on the ability to qualify these legitimacy appeals with actual guarantees of quality of life. So if arbitrary executions, detention, intimidations, murders by mistake, etc, are sought to be justified in the name of upholding nationalism, or dismissed as collateral damage in this war, the only casualty ultimately would be the awe with which the same brand of nationalism is held by the public. Interestingly, it is Manipur more than anywhere else, which has seen the public saying no to these “nationalistic” atrocities regardless of which side of the battlefront the atrocities are committed by. In this sense, it would not be very wrong to say that the show of public outrage at the sudden spurt of midnight knocks followed by executions in 2004, the final victim being Thangjam Manorama, marked by the naked protest in front of the Kangla while it was still occupied by the Assam Rifles, and the defiant stance at Heirok and Lilong Chajing today, where the public are actually ready to go to war over unwarranted killings, tell the same story. What we are witnessed to in either case is plain and raw public anger on display. This should explain our reservation on the Manipur government’s response in the present case. The question is whether any government is warranted to give official sanction to expressions of raw public anger, however justified that anger is, instead of attempting to channel the same outrage into established institutional expressions. Wouldn’t this amount to a return to medieval justice, where public stoning to death, lynching, maiming etc, had official sanction? The lesson, we must add, is for both the establishment, as much for those who are fighting to wrest control of the establishment.
The Manipur government’s decision to arm the willing amongst its civil population is not altogether without precedence though. The experiment is currently being carried out in Chhattisgarh to combat the rising threat of Maoist insurgency. Much before this, and nowhere else than in Manipur, was witnessed another incarnation of the same policy in the shape of the Village Voluntary Force, VVF, founded by none other than a towering figure, Major Bob Khathing, a highly decorated soldier and administrator in British India as well as independent India, and a minister in the first Manipur cabinet, while it was still a sovereign state when the Manipur constitution came into force and the kingdom transitioned into a constitutional monarchy. Major Khathing’s VVF was founded to resist the Japanese onslaught into Ukhrul district from Burma during the World War II, and leading from the front he demonstrated how potent the force can be. The VVF survived long after the war and were again put into action during the heights of Naga insurrection. While the force was known as VVF in the Manipur hills, it was named Village Guards, VG, in the erstwhile Naga Hill district of Assam. Most of the VVF volunteers in later years were to be absorbed into the SSB. Although the VVF’s role in these projects is known (www.manipurpolice.org), it is arguable if it has been of any help in bringing about a final resolution, considering that insurrections in Nagaland and Manipur are still far from over. The extent to which violence and militarization have taken roots in the Naga society is also for anybody to see.
Beyond the ethics of the development, there is another complication obfuscating the debate. This new war has an added incentive. In one go, 500 low salary (not so by Manipur market standard) jobs have been created, and in a job famished state, it will not be a surprise at all if there are more villages in the future clamouring for the benefits of the new policy to be extended to them as well. Much of the outrage such as those seen in Heirok and Lilong would then have acquired a mercenary hue. The depth to which violence would have sunk into the soul of the place is for anybody to imagine. The distinction between combatants and civilians too would have considerably blurred.
Comments