By Amar Yumnam
There is an underlying tension occupying the mind, individual and collective, of the people of Manipur today. This is the consequence of the absence of a shared trajectory of development for all and lack of development as such. In the wake of the various dialogues currently under way to address the issues of the prevailing state and those opposing it so far, many group and ethnic based articulations are already making rounds. But in none of these, there is any reflection on the possibilities for evolving a development trajectory shared and which can be shared by all. The models being put forward from all sides are all founded on exclusivity and parting of ways. Here we are forgetting certain critical problems. First, we have to enquire if is there any instance in the development history of the world where heterogeneity of ethnicity, geography and development levels have been addressed carefully and successfully by any of the models being proposed. Even supposing that there is no historical experience anywhere in the world more or less similar to the situation in our region, we have to be doubly careful for we would be creating history. When we create history, it should be of a sustainable model of development and not one of failures. Secondly, there is a federal structure politically in this country. This necessarily entails the application of mind jointly and individually by both federal and provincial authorities to share and evolve policies for development and models for shared one at that. While the federal authority may be best competent to evolve and establish policies for the larger frame, the provincial authorities are definitely more equipped to apply mind for addressing the effects on and the interests of the contextual realities. But in the unfolding scenario, there is no instance of the various parties, groups, authorities and ethnicities involved being aware of these core issues. This however is something we cannot and need not bear for long unless we are looking forward to collapses all round.
Now let us first be clear on what we are looking for in the region. We are fundamentally longing for a social contract which spells a future of shared development such that no drastically low levels of development and comparatively low at that characterises any part of the region. The elements of justice and greater access to justice should characterise the new world we create. It should be founded on a culture of politics which is inclusive and mindful of the others. It should also ensure a kind of generating and fostering a type of equalising foundations for economic well-being for all. The absence of this kind of a world in our region is naturally felt more acutely and in a more sustained way by the relatively more backward groups and areas. These unequal levels of development and unequal bearing of the burdens of underdevelopment have obviously led to the differing articulations of group interests. What is more dangerous is the absence of an effort for evolving a mechanism for congruence and a convergence of these differences. Instead, all the groups seem to be preoccupied in highlighting the differences and heighten whatever conflict in there. This is further aggravated by the absence of a state committed to harmonising the differing groups and the varied articulations.
Here I can only agree when a good professional colleague of mine when he says that we should all be grateful to our luck for the integration that still characterises across geography and groups. One can take up any aspect of modern development to drive home this point. Roads are the prerequisite for any meaningful livelihood effort in the context of the region. But let us look at the conditions and absence of roads even after sixty-two years of democratic existence, we find there is no reason for any group not to feel alienated. Let us look at the educational facilities and support mechanism, it comes out very glaringly that the very understanding of education as the only sustainable foundation for escaping backwardness, poverty and social injustice is yet to sink into the thinking process of our governance. Let us look at the health facilities and the dispersal availability of their access, the same scenario in education and roads prevails here as well. In these circumstances, there is no reason for any group to feel satisfied, reassured and prepared for further delay for the development to arrive. To add salt to injury, we are yet to see the emergence of a state as manifested through the regional government which is alive to the development tensions and thus endeavours to continually display a kind of incessant care and love for the people; the disconnect between the government and the governed is real . The disconnect between the articulations of protagonists of the group benefitting from whatever features of progress and the protagonists of the groups representing absence of progress is also equally widening. Instead of efforts for enunciating points of convergence, all the parties are busy at buttressing the divergence and countering each other.
It is exactly at this moment that the provincial government has an important role to play in a way very different from that of the federal authority. The provincial authority is anytime more alert and more competent to feel the regional pulse(s) and better equipped to establish policies to address these pulses. At this very moment, we expect that the provincial authority should mobilise all thinking power to evolve a kind of development model which can address the issues hitherto unattended. This process should be able to pave the way for convergence of feelings and sharing an inclusive development trajectory. For long we have rather devoted our energy in opposing proposals and stunting initiatives, but we should now take the initiatives in our hands and prove the world our ability to evolve a model of development in difficult circumstances. The time available at our disposal is short and the surroundings are changing fast.