(contd from last edition)
Q: You are demanding for talks, but do you think such talks will bring final solution to your problems because we see that the National Socialist Ccouncil of Nagalim (IM) etc are having so many rounds of such dialogue yet the solution still is not in sight.
T Guite: Who says that UPF is demanding talks? We demand AHS in Manipur and are waiting for political dialogue. The duration of talks must be understood with the nature of the demands. The All Party Hill Leaders Conference (APHLC) hardly take three years to arrive at an agreement for AHS in Assam; there are groups in Assam which signed an agreement within five years; Mizo National Front took about 15 years and the Indo-Naga talk continues for over 15 years now. We are hopeful that a viable agenda like Autonomous Hill State (AHS) which surely is for the betterment of all communities in Manipur as well as the Government of India will not take much time to ink a solution once political dialogue process start.
Q: How many groups are there under UPF?
T Guite: The are seven seven groups under UPF:- Kuki National Front (KNF), Hmar Peoles’ Convention- Democtatic (HPC-D), United Kuki Liberation Front (UKLF), Zou Defence Volunteer (ZDV), Zomi Revolutionary Army (ZRA) and Zomi Revolutionary Front (ZRF).
Q: Do you think the UPF alone is in a position to get the desired Hill state without other major constituent of the Hill people especially the Kuki and Naga?
T Guite: Let me clarify. When we say, “Hill People” it is inclusive of all communities living in hill areas of Manipur – both the Tribal and Non-Tribal and UPF’s demand is not a full-fledge “Hill State” but an “Autonomous Hill State (AHS) within Manipur”. We envisioned that, once AHS in Manipur is created, all communities living in Hill areas of Manipur will enjoy the benefits of an Autonomous State and every community, whether big or small, shall have their share in the administration. Furthermore, the parent State, Manipur will develop hundred times more than the current pace of developments since it will shred the burden of managing or mismanaging the hill areas with limited fund being received from the Government of India.
It will be unrealistic to expect hundred percent unity amongst the hill people to arrive at a solution; but as we are aware, in democracy, majority voice is the voice of the people. Towards this end we have been in touch with the KNO, the Naga frontal organizations and representatives of Meitei society. It is very encouraging to learn that all the hill people, irrespective of their community affiliation, shared common grievances, dreams of a better political status, yet they are unable to arrive at a common goal. The viability of different demands (Kuki State, Autonomous Hill State or Alternative Arrangement) shall be debated upon during the process of political dialogue. It is a matter of time for other to realize the geopolitical reality and accept the most pragmatic choice.
Q: The fact that the UPF had signed SoO with the Govt. under Kuki banner, then what is the different between the KNO and UPF in its ideology and goal?
T Guite: The impression, ‘under Kuki banner’ or ‘Kuki arm groups’ is artificially created by some section of the media community, perhaps for convenience sake. The UPF was formed on issue base, leaving aside our smaller differences and pursuing a non-communal political goal. Unlike KNO, UPF is not a military alliance but an issue based grouping of like-minded organizations. The approach of UPF is non-violence, non-communal and issue-based; our demand is inclusive, pragmatic and achievable within the parameters of the SoO agreement. In our viewpoint, the creation of Autonomous Hill State in Manipur is the surest means to protect Manipur’s territorial integrity and develop both the hills and valley of the State in equal footing.
On the other hand, KNO and KSDC stand for nomenclature based demand which is outside the purview of the agreed SoO preamble as it requires re-drawing of Manipur State boundary. It is an exclusive demand for a particular community which again is impractical in a multi-ethnic state like Manipur.
Q: What is the UPF response from the open invitation by the President of KNO that they had no problem to have the propose state as Zo State instead of Kuki State? Will it not had cut more ice if the two unite?
T Guite: The ideology of UPF is inclusive and based on issue sans nomenclature. It does not demand political status for a particular ethnic group. We do have a couple of meetings with KNO in order to arrive at a common political demand. The process is still going on. It is our dreams that, not only KNO, but United Naga Council, Meitei and other non-Tribals come together and join our struggle for a developed Manipur. Any person who undergoes objective study of AHS demand will surely understand the soundness of our proposition for ushering in an equitable development in Manipur while maintaining its territorial integrity.
Q: The “Demand and desire” don’t withstand its hype as shown by the Naga issue, in case your original demand is rejected do you have a backup plan or alternate arrangement or mechanism in place to response to the rejection of your demand.
T Guite: UPF never have original or duplicate demand. Our demand for AHS is workable and pragmatic.
It is also unrealistic to compare the AHS demand in Manipur with State demands in different parts of India. In a democratic country like India, every community, groups or region has the legitimate right to demand any political status, but the merit of such demands should be the basis of a solution. For instance, in case of Manipur, further fragmentation of the state into 2 or 3 more full-fledges state is not pragmatic; however, in view of the uniqueness of hill areas administration and the inefficiency of the present local-self government to ensure all round development of the hill people, it is important for us to look for a viable options. It was for a unique situation like this that Jawaharlal Nehru came out with the idea of an ‘Autonomous State’ or ‘State within a State’, giving fullest autonomy (internal) without disturbing the existing State (parent state).
What we need in Manipur is a workable system of hill areas administration. A mere symptomatic treatment to the problem or lollipop-typed developmental packages is unlikely to bring durable solution until and unless the inadequacy in administrative set-up is addressed adequately. All other options, other than AHS, shall also be judged on the basis of this principle and if the need arises, at any point of time; the UPF will consult the hill people before taking final decision.