Home coming or surrender... Legitimising the 'pretenders'
- The Sangai Express Editorial :: June 16, 2011 -

Delhi and Imphal, including the security forces, have every reason to feel a sense of euphoria whenever any underground cadre surrenders, for it is in sync with the 'bringing them back to the mainstream' line of thought, scripted with so much trouble and hard work by the Government.

If the cadre surrenders along with arms, the better it is, and a look at any of the rehabilitation programme drawn up by the Government, both at the State level as well as at the Centre, will leave no one in doubt that the Government is dead serious about the business of surrender.

Rehabilitation programme rests on two premises. For one it is the politically correct thing to do and hence something to crow about in the international fora. Secondly the promise of a regular job, plus the financial incentives that come along with the type of guns and ammos surrendered, are just too tempting and will attract anyone, particularly the boys in the jungle.

So every surrender is seen and interpreted as a boost to the measures taken up by the Government while it is viewed as a setback to the organisation in particular and the armed movement in general.

This is the positive side as seen and understood from the viewpoint of the Government, but as is the case with every programme and policy taken up by the Government there is a downside to the surrender scheme and there are reasons for the discerning citizens to hold this viewpoint.

The armed movement in the region cannot be understood only in terms of the activities of the militants or the purely militaristic approach taken up by the Government such as counter-insurgency operations and imposition of Acts like AFSPA but need to include other factors such as the surrender policy, peace pacts, political dialogues, propaganda warfare, military civic action programme etc.

The question that should naturally follow a study of these factors while analysing the armed movement will thus run along the line of whether the policies formulated by the Government to contain or rein in the militant outfits have had the desired impact or not.

The surrender policy has been in vogue for quite a long time and cease fire and peace pacts may be said to date back to the time when the militants first started firing their guns. Why is it then that there are no solid indications as yet that the armed movement will come to an end in the near future ?

There are no easy answers except for the fact that the Government policies have not been able to deliver the final death blow to the armed movement. This is not a comfortable position for the Government at all and this calls for some uncomfortable questions to address to.

Has the Government and its agencies cared to look and study the antecedents of any of the militant groups which have surrendered enmasse or have signed the peace pacts ?

Other than the NSCNs and the group of ULFA led by Arabinda Rajkhowa, can the Government really say that they have managed to win over the other 'significant' players in the armed movement ?

There may be no scepticism at all in the line of thought that till date majority of those who have come to the 'mainstream' are nothing much more than those with nuisance value and sooner or later they were bound to wrap up their 'mission' for there is truth in the observation 'you cannot fool all the people all the time.'

To be brutally frank and forthright, it will not be wrong at all to say that some of those who have laid down their arms had nothing to do with the genuine understanding of the armed movement. At best they flickered on the horizon only to fade away and come back to haunt the people in the guise of the movement we are talking about.

The situation is conducive for such groups to mushroom and to many of them the modus operandi is clear. First take up the gun on some lofty ideals, coin a highly patriotic sounding name, publish their arrival in the State newspapers, particularly the vernacular dailies, and then get down to the business of making money in the name of the cause.

Heaven help the newspaper which refuse to carry their statements, announcing their arrival. Politicians of the dubious kind are known to patronise such elements and when the moolah has been raked in, give up to the Government amid pomp and grandeur and to hell with facing the legal system for all the crimes committed while in the mask of the freedom fighters.

The downside, as we said, lies in the fact that these people will be rehabilitated with monthly stipend from the tax payers' money not to speak of the possible Government job at the end of a certain period !

This is having your cake and eating it too. In a way it is surprising that the Government should pursue such a policy, which in a way seeks to legitimise the activities of those who don the mask of the militants while at the same time refusing to listen to the demand raised from some quarters that arrested leaders of militant outfits be treated as political prisoners !

This is the irony of the situation and a reality check will answer the question of why the public are not ready to digest the stories of surrender as precursors of a better future, sans violence.

We are also more than sure that the Government agencies, particularly the Assam Rifles, the State police and the Army realise that surrender ceremonies as seen today, are nothing more than charades, whether one calls it home coming or plain surrender, with due respect to the IG of Assam Rifles.