Will the North East map be re-drawn again ?

Roluahpuia *

The decision of the Telagana movement has revived back the statehood demand all over the country. The Government at the Centre has succumbed to the demand for a separate Telangana and placed itself in a dilemma for it has opened a door for statehood demand across the country. Each geographical region (South/North India, North East India) of the country is under pressure as new demands of state are floated all over again.

If all demands are granted by choice or by force, then the number of states in the country can shoot up to 50 (estimates Indian Times, August 04, 2013 issue). Out of the 50 states, the North East is meant to contribute 13 if all the statehood demands are granted.

Statehood demands in the past and present have the capacity to generate conflicts and political turmoil in the North East. In fact, the resurgence of the statehood demand are already putting majority of the states’ of the region in trouble, particularly in Assam and Manipur. Numerous protest movements in the form of bandhs, strikes and demonstration are now the order of the day. Such ensuing upheavals are already leading to a series of political crisis.

In the early year of independent India, what is today North East India was just merely Assam along with two princely states, Manipur and Tripura. Often known as ‘Greater Assam’ or Undivided Assam’, the states such as Meghalaya, Mizoram were once the district of it. Assam therefore was the principal identity of the region in the early years of independent India.

Nonetheless, it did not take even a decade to see its first re-drawing of boundaries with the granting of statehood to Nagaland in 1963. What was fundamental in granting statehood to Nagaland was that the application of the ‘principle of ethnicity’. To put it more bluntly, the ethno-centric model was applied in the case of the North East.

Now if one looks at the current demand for statehood in the region, ethnicity has formed the basis for such demands. Be it the Bodoland in Assam to Kukiland in Manipur or the Gorkhaland in hills of West Bengal to the Garoland in Meghalaya, it is the ethnic factor which is the source of mobilisation. Does it imply that the current demands are a historical mistake of the Indian Government?

In most cases, the ethnic groups who demand separate state enjoy autonomous power in their respective states. Such autonomous councils come with the package of power and privilege which allow the groups to govern their own internal affairs. Yet, to some of the ethnic groups such as the Gorkhas and the Bodos, such councils are a reward for giving up violence. Again here, the questions arise to how far the autonomous/regional councils have succeeded in fulfilling ethnic aspirations? Or is it that the solution of the problem does not lie in mere territorial council or autonomous council?

Another sort of problem that always posed serious question in the case of the North East is its multi-ethnic nature. One may not be wrong to say that no states or even districts in the North East are entirely homogenous. In this respect, there is conflict over the territory claimed for such demands. Such territorial conflict often has led to tragic ethnic cleansing and mass displacement. This is partly because each ethnic groups does not see a solution except through a total defeat of the other and each of them are holding fast to vehemently conflicting positions suggesting that ultimately the battlefield is the only way out. The Naga-Kuki conflict of 1992-97 is one such case.

However, one must be aware of the fact the re-organization of the state in mainland India and that of the North East are two different things as social structure and political dynamics are unique to one another. Yet, the commonality is that there is serious division on opinion about the formation of new states across party lines, civil societies and even among the major public. Nonetheless, the great differences between the mainland India and the North East must always be kept in mind as such misreading has caused much harm already in the region than one can imagine.

Furthermore, as regional party are gaining foothold, it has become imperative for Congress to seek allies and alter its strategy. The political uncertainty of the 2014 elections has cost them to step down and forced them to take such decision. Here again, it is hard to believe that the demand of the states in the North East will received much attention going by the number of representatives the ethnic groups have in the Houses of Parliament. Under such circumstances, the demands from the North East carry less weight as compared to demand for Telangana or for that matter, other states of mainland India.

Indeed, there are many other factors that drive the engine of such demand such as history, culture, economics, etc. To the ethnic groups, state has become the ‘Promised Land’ and is the only solution lying before them. As a Bodo protesters hold, ‘No State, No Justice’. The same applies to the ethnic groups such as the Kukis in Manipur or the Karbis in Assam. Yet, how promising is the ‘Promised Land’ is another baffling question. Or will the Centre Government fulfill their ‘Promised Land’?

By way of ending, the decision of the UPA Government has made the North East more vulnerable in many ways. Against this background, how unthinkable is the re-drawing of the map of the North East? Is another Re-organization the way out in the North East? Or will the Centre wait for such demands to go on and wane away in due course of time? Such question needs to be seriously considered in the light of the changing dynamics of the region.

Meanwhile, it is quite clear that the UPA or say the Congress in particular lack any alternative plan for the people of the North East. I am of the opinion what is required in this respect is to invoke but not to clone what has been in other parts of the country in the North East India. At the same time, keeping things as they are is not going to worked either. They are old problems which require new solutions.