It is not consultation at all : Setting the record straight
- The Sangai Express Editorial :: October 24, 2012 -

(Map of NE India) Gogoi of Assam; Ibobi of Manipur and Tuki of Arunachal Pradesh :: Pix - TSE

The record has to be set straight.

Delhi is not 'consulting' either with Imphal or Dispur or Itanagar.

It has simply put forward a draft proposal it has made after intense discussion with the NSCN (IM) before the State Governments of Assam, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh.

Yes, it is one step up from the 'ceasefire without territorial limits' clause of 2001 or the go ahead signal given to the proposal for Th Muivah to visit his native place at Somdal village in 2010, when the Government of Manipur was not at all taken into confidence.

This time, Delhi is seeking to convey the message that the three State Governments are being kept informed.

To equate this with taking the three States into confidence while working out the model for a settlement would be a fallacy.

This much must be clear to anyone who has that teeny weeny bit of interest in a settlement that could have a profound impact on their land and in the people to people relationships.

Real politiks at work. Creating a space to pile on the pressure on three elected Governments seems to be the approach that Delhi has adopted.

That Manipur has a bigger stake in the issue than Assam and Arunachal Pradesh is a reality. The profile of the leadership and cadres of the NSCN (IM) and the geography of the place are enough indicators.

That the Okram Ibobi Singh Government has adopted a strong stand against any design to compromise with the interest of Manipur is something which has been repeated umpteen times, as some sort of assuring the people, but it would need more than a strong stand to blunt the political machinations that Delhi may just conjure.

This is where political acumen comes into play. It may not be enough for Ibobi to do his best, but he should also be seen as doing his best. Thin dividing line, but nevertheless extremely important given the sensitive nature of the issue.

"Something good." These were the two words that Thuingaleng Muivah uttered on his arrival at Dimapur some days back to the media.

That "something good" is good, in fact excellent. But it should not come at the price of others. This is also equally important.

The question of how accommodative one should be or how much should one give to ink a political settlement cannot be the onus of only one party. It has to be equally shared.

And giving up the demand for sovereignty may be counted as being accommodative to the interest of Delhi but not Manipur's. This is how the fine print should be read.

If being accommodative cuts both ways then it also stands that belligerence cannot be the call of any of the parties concerned. This is also a fact that should not be overlooked.

Crystal ball gazing or reading the tea leaves may not come under the parameters of the pure sciences, but this is no reason why the lines between what have been coming out from different sources should not be studied to arrive at some sort of an understanding.

This is not to say that conclusions should be drawn up. Not yet, for that would be premature.

But there is still the need for the political leadership of the three States to be on their toes and try to understand what is being left unsaid by Delhi.

It is the part on which the Centre is silent that Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh should be wary about. And this is where political acumen and statesmanship is called for to identify the unsaid but significant part.

It is also extremely important to differentiate between holding opposing political views on the issue and taking a stand that divides people on the basis of ethnicity and community.