The mass movement in Manipur

Manipur, especially the Imphal valley, is in the throes of an extra-ordinary mass movement around the Inner Line Permit (ILP) issue, in the face of relentless curfews. Protesters have been killed and wounded by official men in Khaki uniforms as part of ‘duty’. That we do not hear more about it is because there is no senile ‘Gandhian’ or Gurgaon candle-holder or tricolour self-righteousness involved. Of course the other reason is the purported “insignificance” of Manipur in the “national” scene. This “national scene” effectively came into being in the Indian Union after the Republic was proclaimed in 1950. Even before the Indian Union was a Republic, it had managed to dismiss the democratically elected government of Manipur led by the Praja Shanti party. The Congress had fought the elections of Manipur and lost. Manipur, with an elected government and at that point not an integral part of the Union, was annexed by the Union of India, which was still not a Republic. Indian Union brought ‘democracy’ to Manipur by kidnapping the unelected King of Manipur when he was in Shillong and making him sign a merger document under coercion. This happened at a time when Manipur had an elected representative government. New Delhi-sponsored democracy has been unstoppable in Manipur ever since. Original sins often create particularly bad ulcers. Excision is not an option for a “modern nation state” that has creation-myths going back to the age of Dinosaurs and even further past. Hence “insignificant” ulcers bleed on as the rest of the body is on sugar-pills, reading history and civics dutifully from official textbooks.

The ILP is an Indian Union government issued travel document that outsider Indian citizens need to enter Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Nagaland (except Dimapur). The non-partisan civic-political coalition called JCILP has ushered in a powerful movement thats rocking the Imphal valley. It wants the ILP system to be promulgated in Manipur too. The ILP system was introduced during the late 19th century – a time when the British were making new territorial acquisitions in the present day Northeast by force and adding these newly acquired areas to what they called India. The ILP was partially developed to secure British commercial interests by maintaining peace without spending resources. In a partial sense, the British outlook was similar to the way it dealt with what are now the FATA areas of Pakistan. British acquisitions that were beyond the inner-line enjoyed considerable internal autonomy in their own administration and this enjoyed relatively more ‘Swaraj’ much before Indian nationalists also wanted it for themselves too. The fact that the ‘Swaraj’ that was introduced after the British endorsed transfer of power to chosen brown leaders is more like New-Delhi raj is another matter altogether. A cursory look at the wide range of subjects in the Union list tells that story.

The British outlook was similar to the way it dealt with what is now FATA in Pakistan

Manipur didn’t have the ILP system because when the British were busy expanding their India into these areas, the sovereign ruler of Manipur managed to preserve Manipur’s centuries old distinctiveness, politically and otherwise. Manipur was not a part of British India. Hence, the ILP did not apply to Manipur. It had its own ways of self-preservation. The loss of Manipur’s autonomy in 1949 with the merger agreement put it at a disadvantage. It had no ILP and hence had no method of regulating the entry of outsiders. Though signed under allegedly dubious circumstances that make the validity of any signature questionable, Article VIII of the merger document did state that the Government of India undertakes “to preserve various laws, customs and conventions prevailing in the State pertaining to the social, economic and religious life of the people”. The ILP demand is about preserving the way of the life of the communities of Manipur. And these communities live on real land, are very small in number compared to outsiders and hence the regulation of entry-traffic stems from the anxiety of being destroyed by numerically superior demographic forces not under Manipur’s control. That anxiety has some real basis.

One can ask, are we not all Indians, from Kashmir to Kanyakumari?  Whether we are one people or not, depends on who you ask the question but what is certain is that we are co-citizens and should enjoy similar freedoms. The youth of Imphal do not enjoy the freedoms available to the youth of Delhi. Probing those differences may bring out unpalatable truths. I have always found it very interesting how Indian Union and its ‘national’ media showers more concern on the treatment of Manipuri students in Delhi than the condition of actual Manipur. Do we even know what’s going on in the north-east given India is a free and democratic republic and all that? It is public knowledge that the legitimacy of the Indian Union’s control over certain territories of the Indian Union’s northeast is strongly challenged by many members of the public in those areas. Whoever wants to deny this is simply being absurd. No serious discussion can start with a denial of this ground-truth. It is not hard to guess who benefits the most from the tensions between Nagas and Meiteis (all bonafide citizens of the Indian Union, by the way).

While sections of the ILP movement point to ‘non-Indian’ outsiders as its primary concern that is a narrative of tactical convenience, given that Manipur is at present a part of the Indian Union. The population of Uttar Pradesh is 75 times that of Manipur. For communities that once enjoyed autonomy in their territory to suddenly become ‘small’ or even minority in their own territory is extremely destablizing. While the Indian Union constitution shows no concern for demographic anxieties within subsets of its population, the anxieties are real, especially in the backdrop of widely varying poverty levels and total fertility rates in different parts of the Indian Union. Interestingly, Angami Zapu Phizo, the legendary Naga statesman, declared in 1951 that ‘ we can easily be submerged and get lost: our culture, our civilization, our institutions, our nation and all that we had struggled and build up as we are today will be perished without the least benefit to mankind’. Without the least benefit to mankind. No one wants to become a pariah in their homeland. It is this plural vision of the future that has to be remembered. Can Tamil-speakers imagine a Tamil Nadu where they will be a minority? Can that ever be a good thing? If such a scenario threatens to emerge, can we even imagine the kinds of forces that will be unleashed as a reaction? No people should be pushed to such a corner.

In the merger document, the Indian Union had pledged to preserve the Manipuri way of life. Introduction of ILP is crucial to that preservation. It has also supported the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which accepts that indigenous people “have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their rights to participate fully, if they choose to, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the state”. To redeem that pledge by the Indian Union, in letter and in spirit, is the only honourable solution. ILP for Manipur is an idea whose time has come.