Seminar : Roots Of Conflict Resolution In Manipur :: A report
- Day II: 9 April 2015 -

H. Sukhdeba / Homen Thangjam / Aheibam Koireng *

Seminar : Roots Of Conflict Resolution In Manipur at IGNTU Regional Campus, Manipur on April 8– 9, 2015

Two day National Seminar
ROOTS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN MANIPUR: CLAIMS AND COUNTER CLAIMS
Organised by
Department of Social Work,
Indira Gandhi National Tribal University (IGNTU),
Regional Campus, Manipur
Date: April 8– 9, 2015 : Venue: AMITY Hall,
IGNTU Regional Campus, Manipur

Day II: 9 April 2015

The second day of the two-day national seminar titled started with Session III, which was chaired and co-chaired by Prof. S. Mangi Singh, HoD Political Science, Manipur University (MU) and Dr. Aheibam Koireng, Asst. Prof., Centre for Manipur Studies, MU respectively. Altogether 11 (eleven) papers were presented during the Session.

The session started with a paper titled, "Conflicts and Conflict Resolution in Manipur" presented by Dr. Th. Siamkhum, Associate Professor, Churachandpur College. His premise was that conflicts in Manipur are inter and intra-ethnic conflict in nature. According to him, conflict between the Nagas and the Meiteis can be attributed to the conflicting interest and political aspirations in which each group has a different interpretation of history. But this type of conflict is not an open armed-conflict but a kind of cold war.

Then, he elaborated on other types of conflict that took place in Manipur such as the Kukis and the Nagas ethnic conflict, the Kuki-Zomi or Kuki Paite conflict in 1997, the Hmars and the Kukis conflict in 1962 and the conflict between the Meiteis and the Meitei- speaking Muslim in the 1993. He concluded that a close analysis of the above mentioned conflicts in Manipur are all inter and intra-ethnic conflicts culminations of divergent political aspirations among various ethnic groups. The interventions of different ethnic based armed insurgent groups are creating ethnic conflicts in Manipur more complicated.

The second paper titled, "Hills Vs. Valley: Colonial Construction of Space in Manipur" was presented by Ching Ngaih, Ph.D. Research Scholar, University of Hyderabad. From a historico-geographical perspective, she attempted to locate the current formation of the post-colonial regional and ethnic identities of Manipur. She argued that social imaginations of social identities or differences are produced by the spatial difference that people perceives. Further, she added that colonial knowledge and spatial imagination have shaped and re-constructed the history and identity of modern Manipur. The colonial state deployed its own understanding of "space" in Manipur using modern technology of cartography and the modern notion of state with its frontiers and its close scrutiny of all kinds of resources within this space, borders and roads. She concluded that the politics of the post-colonial Manipur identity is the reproduction of the British colonial power. Such particular development leads to contestation for power over the name and meaning given to a particular place.

The third paper was presented by Lt. (Dr.) Bhabananda Singh T., Asst. Professor History, Manipur College, Imphal. In his paper, "What We Want, Can Get, And Will Pursue: Dynamics of Conflict Resolution in Manipur", Lt. (Dr.) Bhabananda argued that conflict and violence is a part of historical process by which people, groups, and states adjust their different and changing interests, capabilities, and wills. It is both a manifestation of a breakdown in social expectations and a means by which new expectations can be formed. He puts forth the necessity for resolving conflict if they are extreme. He concluded by stating that conflicts are resolved when people make peace by balancing powers, breaking down existing status quo and achieve an interlocking of mutual interests, capabilities, and wills.

Dr. K. Ibotombi Singh, Guest Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Manipur University spoke on "Spirituality: A Context of Conflict Resolution From the Vedic Perspective". As the title suggest his paper dealt with identifying the root cause of conflict in the society from the Vedic perspective.

Speaking on, "Contestations for Sovereignty Over Land and Natural Resources: A Legal Perspective on the Political Economy of the Manipur-India Conflict", L. Malem Mangal, Assistant Professor, Royal Academy of Law, Oinam contended that the annexation of Manipur by the Indian State since 1949 is an ongoing process. According to him, the economic repercussions of the annexation process are beginning to unfold with more intensity. The Indian State has established its authority over the lands, natural resources and peoples of Manipur by using various policies (both appeasement as well as coercive). The paper calls for a serious politics to contest and challenge the virtual authority of the State in the exploitation of lands and natural resources pending the resolution of the Manipur-India conflict. He concluded by stating that the politics of retaining sovereignty over natural resources constitute the core of the right to self-determination struggles.

The fifth paper titled, "Seeing Self-Determination: Is It a Right or Something Else?" by Arambam Noni, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Moirang College, explores the concept of Self Determination while trying to rescue from seeing it as a mere voice and choice which is subject to several conditions like exercisability. The apathetic conditioning insulates self-determination into a secessionist trajectory, thereby becoming a problematic right. It concludes that the complexity of self-determination is, thus, increased once the text of self-determination is contextualised through the idioms of rights. SD remains a difficult right as long it remains as a prerogative language of the states, which is in question. Self-determination as a right is, thus, embroiled in the tangles engineered by states thereby complicating its liberating ethos and politics.

The sixth paper titled, Manipur's Political Impasse & the Bottlenecks in Reaching a Solution by Rameshchandra Ningthoujam, PhD Candidate, International and Intercultural Studies University of Deusto, Bilbao, Spain, argued that the developmentalist or the modernist path that the Indian Government embarked was neither implemented from the result of a selection set by the policy makers at the center (New Delhi) about what would be the best for the well being of the people of this region, nor was it the inevitable mission for all round development of this region. Rather it is an intended effort to exert control over this frontier region to make it a 'normal' part of India's national space. This path will ultimately lead to a disastrous outcome, i.e. to rely on the strategy of filling up (nationalizing) this fringe region with the nation bearing migrants will exacerbate the socio-political problem of this region.

Longjam Meena Devi, PhD Scholar, Department of Mass Communication, Manipur University presented a paper on, "Media's role in resolving conflict and facilitating peace in Manipur: its perspectives and process". The paper highlighted the various process and perspectives of media in facilitating peace and necessitates the need of resolving conflict in present context of Manipur. She argues that reporting in conflict situation can always be seemingly dangerous and very sensitive, as media can lead to change in opinion of the masses; it is where specialised journalism like peace journalism with ethical guidelines can work as a pacifier among ethnic communities in conflict and contributes peaceful settlements.

Loijinglenchingsanglakpa Nameirakpam presented a paper titled "The Roots Cause Of Conflict Resolution In Manipur: Origin And Present Perspective Of Conflict". He attributed the prevalence of conflict situation in the state to a lack of proper leadership and poor quality of governance.

Sobita Devi Mongjam, Asst. Librarian, Central Agriculture University presented a paper titled, "Roots of Conflict in Manipur and Conclusion". She deliberated how in the conflict situation the common people are being violated by the armed actors including committing sacrilege in the places of worship. She concluded that bringing about a conclusion to the situation is the only way to save human lives.

The tenth paper titled "Youth and Conflict with special reference to Community Setting" by Vaskar Mutum, Administrative Officer, State Level Nodal Agency (Integrated Watershed Management Programme), Planning Department, Govt. of Manipur purports itself as a conceptual analysis stressing on how young people are being branded as a victim and perpetrator of conflict and further dwelt on how young people can be engaged positively towards community development in particular and nation building in large.

"Youth Participation In Conflict Resolution: A Case Of Kangchup In Senapati District Manipur" by Onkholun Haokip, Research Scholar, Department of Social Work, Assam University, Silchar studies the contributions of youth towards Conflict Resolution in the context of Kangchup in Manipur, which is inhabited by different community like the Meiteis (General), Phayengs (SC) and tribals like the Chirus, Thadous, Liangmeis, Vaipheis etc. Besides, situated at the adjacent of two district Imphal West (valley) and Senapati District (hills). Different communities lived peacefully since time immemorial, but in recent mid 1990s and 2000s, conflicts over the land arise. The study reveals that most of the conflicts are motivated by external factors such as irresponsible persons and the victims are innocent people. He concluded that conflict resolution can happen only through compromise with the active involvement of a third party.

Ngamtinlung Touthang, Research Scholar, Department of Political Science, Manipur University, presented a paper titled, "Inter Community Relations in Manipur: Problems and Prospects". He stated that the State of Manipur is inhabited by three major (Indigenous) Communities—viz., the Meiteis, the Nagas, and the Kukis, who are sometimes refered to as the three pillar of the state. The inter-community relationship between these three Communitties has been seen as more of conflictual than cordial. According to him, one interesting thing about the people of Manipur is that though we seems to be always in conflict, at the political or community level, at the individual level, we are still very close or have no grudge among ourselves. For instance, a valley person going to the hills, especially for social welfare mission (like health Workers, census enumerator, etc) will normally find the best hospitality, and Vice Versa. This shows that dialogue or more open discussion so as to built social integration is not impossible. The conflict that we see is more of creation of media and prism of ethnic/ communal politics. Therefore, there is the need for reviving the lost mutual trust, more interaction/ open discussion.

The final session of the National seminar titled, "Perspectives on Conflict Resolution" was Chaired by Prof. W Nabakumar Singh, Department of Anthropology, Manipur University. Four Resource persons presented papers during the session.

Dr. Dhanabir Laishram, Social Scientist, speaking as a Resource Person shared that to bring about resolution of the conflict in Manipur the conflicting parties have to sacrifice their interests. He added that the prevailing contradictions have to be realigned starting from the constitution of India by taking into account new forms of claims, which are produced by the exigency of times. First priority is making the constitution democratic by incorporating aspirations of the people. According to him, there is the need for reduction of internal contradictions existing amongst the oppressed people. Need to fight together against the principal antagonist, which so far is not the case in the Northeast. Instead the oppressed people are divided and fight amongst themselves in the name of identity or on community or ethnic lines. As a result, the internal contradiction has become voluminous. Class structure has failed to flourish in the Northeast or Manipur.

He stated that people have initiated movement for resolution of conflict but not from the side of the government. Instead Government have earned money through promises of peace. So far, the Government has been relying on the carrot and stick method, which is completely outdated. In his opinion, the Government has to occupy the middle space between the state and non-state actors. Finally he concluded by raising two points: first, oppressed people irrespective of ethnic or community affiliation has to come together and either fight against the principal oppressor or negotiate with it. Secondly, one has to give up the belief that prosperity and development will take place in the absence of conflict.

Dr. RK Ranjan Singh, Former Registrar, Manipur University, Resource Person asserted that if one knows the root source and genesis of the conflict, then resolution would follow in a defined pattern. First step is putting a halt to militarization for peace and development. In places like Bangshamoro in the Phillipines, the initiative has been creating a platform where all the stake holder work towards peace. On this platform opinions are allowed to be expressed. In the Mindanao Institute of Peace, such an exercise is experimented. In the case of India, such a model has never been tried. Or even in the case of Manipur, people have never attempted to express and share difference and identify the root cause of conflict. Thus, instead of peace we have been witnessing a never ending cycle of violence. Further he added that the Manipuri society has not deliberated whether the struggle for sovereignty has to carry on or whether the society has to think about alternatives such as end the struggle or even transform the movement. He concluded by stating that the Manipuri society is not prepared for a political dialogue in case India opens up for dialogue. Preparedness is needed.

Babloo Loitongbam, Director, Human Rights Alerts, Imphal as Resource Person deliberated from the perspective of human rights. When the United Nations Human Rights Committee analyses the mandate of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, it came out with the observation that India is attempting to break up Manipur. Within the framework of human rights, the other insight was that the Act did not deter the terrorist but has created an atmosphere of fear amongst the people. In the accepted international view on violent extremism or terrorism, first criteria is to find out the root cause of terrorism. So a political approach is needed in places where there is a problem of similar one. Three principles are accepted by the United Nations to bring a political solution. Right to self determination must be respected. Secondly, freedom of expression has to be respected, then only a solution can emerge. Finally, right to participation in the political affairs of the people or governance. These recommendations were given to the Indian state in relation to the case of Manipur.

Further he shared the changing contours of the right to self determination as elaborated in the report on the unresolved self determination movements in the world prepared by Alfred Maurice in 2014. The report advises the States to take cognizance of the existence of self determination movements and ensure the same. He aptly sums up by stating that problem lies not with demanding self determination but by denying self-determination and that the issues has to be addressed by taking into consideration and in compatibility with the norms and benchmark set out by United Nations.

S Bhubol, Former Chairperson, National Research Centre, while speaking on the "Perspectives on Conflict Resolution with Reference to Indo-Manipuri conflict", began by acknowledging that conflict situation prevails in the state of Manipur. According to him, the conflicting atmosphere in between the State and the Non-state entities, is truly the reason behind all kinds of unwanted situations thereby resulting to stunted development on all fronts in the state. In such a situation people are unable to reap the opportunities or meet the challenges in the fast changing world. While narrating the contradictory claims of the state and the non state, he said that Indian tate asserts that Manipur has been a part of India and will continue to remain so at any cost. On the other hand, the Non-State entity maintains that Manipur was not legally merged but annexed coercively under duress to the Dominion of India and so the ongoing right to self-determination movement is a legitimate movement for the people of Manipur.

Dr. S Dilip, Assistant Professor, LMS Law College, Imphal Resource Person spoke on "Conflict Resolution in Manipur". Has the people given recognition that conflict has to be resolved is a big question. According to him, conflict resolution has figured in the election manifestoes of only three political party such as NCP, CPI and Congress (I). all the three political parties agree that absence of job opportunity and lack of development are the factors contributing to people of Manipur taking up arms. The second stakeholder i.e. the Manipur State Government (presently ruling) observes that the conflict in Manipur is a law and order problem. And the Government has used only two methods of resolving conflict so far such as repressive method and surrender policy. It is unlikely that AFSPA will be removed immediately, instead we find imposition of the same in many parts of Arunachal Pradesh. Recruitment of VDF in Manipur is an indication of enhancing the repressive power of the state. Sri Lanka is an example where repressive measures enacted out against the LTTE finds a resounding repercussion today. Thus, in the case of Manipur, too, such measures are unlikely to bring about positive changes. He further elaborated that the political opinion of the non-state actors and the State has not found a meeting or convergent point. In the absence of convergence, there can be no solution in the immediate future.

Prof. MC Arun of Manipur University expressed that in Northeast India various groups are working for each own interest. It is only obvious that there will be conflict of interest both inter community as well as intra-community. Conflict undergoes various phases. Ultimately in conflict transformation the important factor that needs to be taken into account is "whose interest" the transformation will bring about.

The Chair of the function, Prof. W. Nabakumar Singh observed that there is nothing call "one size fits all" when one deals with conflict resolution/management/transformation. Secondly he observed that in history conflicts have been resolved or ended using violent military means; rarely through dialogues on the table. Conflict is the manifestation of suppressed feelings of the people. However, we do not see the Government taking a positive and sincere approach in understanding the cause of the grievances of the people. Government of India has so far taken an aversive approach towards conflict in Manipur with the catch clause that the solution has to been within the framework of the constitution. There has not been reflexive approach on the part of India in the sense that India has not mused or seriously delved into the genesis of conflict and means to bring about an end. What deserves attention is reflexive approach on India's part. Further he shared that knowing the prevailing international norm and ability to mobilize the Manipuri diaspora also needs attention.

Valedictory Function function was held during which the Coordinator of the Seminar distributed certificates.