Reading more into CI Operations : Delhi should be answerable
- Sangai Express Editorial :: June 27, 2013 -

The bodies of the slain NSCN-K cadres brought in a truck at RIMS morgue for necessary procedures on June 24 2013 :: Pix - TSE

Propaganda. Charges and counter charges.

Certainly Counter-Insurgency Operation is not only about busting the camps of militants, eliminating them or convincing them to come to the negotiating table.

There is something much more than this. It is no longer just a bush war waged by armed militants and it is certainly not only about the security forces and the Government agencies pulling no punches to neutralise the strike power of the militants or insurgents or ‘revolutionaries’.

The contrasting and conflicting versions that have emerged from the K Songlung incident in which six cadres of the NSCN (K) were gunned down is a case in point, in fact the latest case, if one may add. Scoring brownie points, or is it something more than this, something which may impact on the ceasefire pact inked between Delhi and the said outfit many years back ? Only time will tell.

At the moment, the United Naga Council has already gone on record and stated that the six were slain in a fake encounter, with family members staunchly corroborating the claims of the UNC.

The Red Shield Division, through the Press Information Bureau (Defence Wing) too has had its say, explaining on how the six were killed in an elaborate manner.

Both parties have had their say and both versions are difficult to dispel.

Official versions are always, nay almost impossible, to negate in the circumstances in which the media works in a State like Manipur and likewise versions issued by frontal organisations, claiming to represent a community or an ethnic group are always difficult to brush aside.

However what has not been said or addressed to by either side is, how cadres of the NSCN (K), which has inked a truce pact with the Government of India were found or ‘taken’ to the deep forest of Songlung ?

The answer to this question should come from Delhi, those men manning the ceasefire pact and minding the business of keeping the peace process on track.

To be sure, Delhi will keep mum. Indifferent may be a more apt term here. Both sides may have their own merits and demerits.

Allegations of fake encounters or ‘fake encounters’ are not something new in Manipur.

The recent observations and conclusions reached by the three men panel appointed by the Supreme Court to probe into six cases of alleged fake encounters in Manipur is a pointer to the reality at the ground level.

Flip the other side of the coin and it also stands true that cadres of outfits, which have entered into truce pacts with the Government of India, move about freely, armed to the teeth.

It is against this backdrop that the charges and counter charges should be studied.

‘Terrorist’ is the term mentioned in the statement issued by the PIB (Defence Wing) to dub the outfit of which the UNC is purportedly a frontal organisation, (The Sangai Express edited this term and replaced it with the more politically correct term, armed group).

This is where a confusion arises. An official statement from the Army dubbing an outfit, which is engaged in a truce pact, ‘terrorist’ leaves many open ended questions.

Does this mean that the Government of India is ready to politically engage with a group, which its Army thinks is a terrorist group ?

Or was the term inserted due to an over sight, a clerical error ?

Whatever the case, the point is, such an ugly incident, read the charges and counter charges, would not have arisen if the ground rules of the cease fire pact are implemented in letter and spirit.

It is this singular failure which has made the numerous peace pacts redundant and meaningless.