Often times ad hominem is employed in debates. And in this entire debates happening in the country with regard to intolerance, an ad hominem has been employed again and again. This is not a valid form argument because instead of arguing against the point being raised, it rather attacks the person.
The historians, scientists, writers and film makers have been returning their awards because, they argue, there is intolerance going on. Certain people have been murdered by self-appointed religious zealots for speaking out against certain form of religious practices and certain other people have been murdered for their association with beef/cow, and again by self-appointed religious zealots. And the murderers in all these cases appeared to have got the audacity to commit such crimes because people in the government have prepared the ground for such crimes, explicitly or implicitly, with their fiery speeches towards people of certain sorts. And these people of particular sorts happened to be the victim.
Now when these historians, scientists, writers and film makers/artists returned their awards protesting against such intolerance in the country, those right wing Saffron brigades who are very supportive of the government came in to defend the government. These bunch of people argue: Where were you when atrocities on Kashmiri Pandits were taking place? Where were you when there was a riot in 1984? Why did you not return your awards then? Thus making it appear as if these people giving back their awards are hypocrites. Well, why they did not return the awards then is indeed a point worth exploring. And each individual may have a response. But I guess the common response could be that whether it's in 1984 or in the case of Kashmiri Pandits, the government's was not complicit like it is happening now. But this is a different point!
But the point is that in this episode the Saffron brigades are employing an ad hominem called tu quoque. So their argument 'where were you then?' does not invalidate the fact that there is intolerance now and this has to be addressed by the government... and that the government of Modi must stop being intolerant. Those who say 'go to Pakistan' or 'drown in the sea' and similar obnoxious arguments must shut their mouth and those who killed people for being different must be booked. The point that those who are returning their awards still stand strong despite the saffron brigades trying to undermine it by raising a fallacious argument.
Arun Jaitley, who holds the post of Finance Minister, says that the Prime Minister Narendra Modi is a victim of intolerance. Read the news here . Jaitley made this statement after many historians, scientists, artists and writers lambasted Modi's government for creating intolerant environment in the country. These people were joined by prominent figures like RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan, Industrialist Narayan Murthy and others. The BJP probably got the sting finally and therefore it was forced to deflect the controversy towards its political rivals. But what is the truth? Is it BJP or the Congress and the Left that have been intolerant all these months?
Until yesterday, as per the paper, RSS was saying the population of Christians and the Muslims must be checked. Prior to that those who share similar ideology with RSS and BJP have made statements that do not epitomise tolerance. One BJP Minister was heard saying 'haraamzada' (Bastards) -- illigitimate child -- to refer to certain group of people. Another one said that those who oppose BJP should go to Pakistan. Still another said that if Muslim must stay in India, they must give up beef; and on one occasion a BJP leader was reported to have said Nathuram Godse, the murderer of Gandhi, was a patriot. Another leader said that those who opposed Surya Namaskar (Sun Worship/Adoration) should drown in the sea. These are all about verbal intolerance. I never hear any such fiery words coming out from the mouth of leaders belonging to the Congress or the Left parties.
But the worse thing is that people like Kalburgi and Pandsare were murdered for being religious critics. Aklaq was murdered after being accused of eating beef, when what he ate was mutton. Rasool was set on fire and died few days later due to injury over rumour of slaughtering cows. All these murderers share similar ideology with that of RSS and BJP. All these killings coming after fiery speeches delivered by RSS/BJP leaders cannot be dismissed as coincidences. These are classical cases of intolerance by RSS and BJP. Modi is not a victim of intolerance of rival parties. At worst Modi is a victim of intolerance of his party members or rather a victim of his own apathy towards intolerance by his party members.
Arun Jaitley is plain wrong to shift the blame to his political rivals for intolerance that fills the air today. His party has not sacked anyone nor taken any disciplinary action against anyone for delivering such speeches. Instead of blaming others, he should have gathered up moral audacity to say that his party has been wrong and now that it is mending ways. Unfortunately BJP has been refusing to show moral uprightness. When the political rivals accused it of corruption and asked the party to sack corrupt members, one BJP leader said something to the effect that removing corrupt people is not in their nature. This is moral bankruptcy. And demonstrating moral bankruptcy in public by such a large political party is to self-destruct.
The other day BJP leader Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi said that those Indian who wanted to continue eating beef should go to Pakistan. Here is the newspaper link. BJP's intention to get slaughtering of cow banned in not secret. But imposing ban on cow slaughtering is to impose ban on the consumption of beef. This does not come as a surprise because leaders from BJP and its right wing fundamentalist mentor RSS have repeated made similar statements.
What comes as a surprise is that the statement is coming from Minister of State for Minority Affairs. The ministry is supposed to be looking after the rights and the interest of the religious minorities. And when certain people in the ruling party want to impose its religious agenda, the ministry is supposed to argue back and caution such people that imposition of such religious agenda goes against the secular nature of the state and thus subverts the liberty of the religious minorities. Instead of being faithful to the task the ministry is supposed to be doing, what the Minister does is a compromise of the purpose of its ministry. This is sad state of affair.
Yes, the senior minister Arun Jaitley has expressed disapproval of the comment. But mere disapproval of the comment is not enough in this regard. Had it come from the minister of other department, that is understandable. But given that this is coming from the Minister of Minority Affair, removing him from this ministry would be the more fitting response from the PM.
One
of the repeated calls of Saffron Parivar – RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal
etc. – against Christianity and Islam is that they are foreign
religion. The objectionable remark made by Food Processing Minister
Niranjan Jyoti in Delhi where she tried to polarise the citizens as
followers of Ram or bastards (Ramzadon
yaharamzadon)
points to this. RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat statement that all Indians
are Hindus, thereby implying that Indians who are not Hindus are
foreigners offers another glaring example. The state also perhaps
unwittingly reinforces this idea when those from Scheduled Caste lose
their entitlements to certain benefit, say, reservation in
state/Central scheme, once they convert of Islam or Christianity.
Conversion to Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism etc. do not merit losing the
reservation benefit. The Scheduled Tribes are exempted from this
implication though.
From
time to time one hears the rhetoric that the religious majority in
India is not allowed to exercise its religiosity openly; that the
religion is under siege. This is also the kind of rhetoric emerging
from the Buddhist Sinhala community in Sri Lanka. The solution to get
out this siege then is to pedestal the religion of the majority above
the rest. The proposal by Union Minister for External Affairs Sushma
Swaraj to declare Bhagavat Gita as the national holy book of India
has to be interpreted as a call for such measure. On the flip side,
by associating nationalism with religion, the rhetorical device
becomes a perfect political tool to subdue the religious minority and
hound them into a ghetto. Religion of the minorities are labelled as
foreign and unpatriotic, if not traitorous. In Sri Lanka, Muslims and
Christians become the victim of such scheme in the hand of Sinhala
Buddhist nationalists. Even in India, during Vajpayee's tenure,
religious minority received battering in significant measure
specially in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. In Myanmar and Nepal
too, such voices emerge from time to time, sending messages of
intimidation to certain religious minorities.
With
widespread use of modern technology, information of any kind now
quickly spreads to different corner of the globe. The demolition of
Babri Masjid in 1992 at Ayodhya, UP, by the volunteers of Sangh
Parivars brought about religious riots between Hindu and Muslims
across different Indian cities. The effect was felt in Pakistan and
Bangladesh too, resulting in Islamic hardliners destroying hundreds
of temples and homes. A Danish political cartoon on prophet Mohammad
(Peace Be Upon Him) evokes sharp response even in Indian subcontinent
as well. Nearer home, Christians and Muslims are not in minority in
all the states in India. Sangh Parivar violent mischief can backfire
in states where these communities are in majority. Given this
volatile and complex environment, it is the responsibility of every
religious and institutional leader to uphold and instil democratic
values. To that end, forceful conversion or attempt to convert others
through inducement should be restrained. Those in the government must
also ensure that non-Hindus are not pushed to second class citizens
of the country.
On
the other hand it is important to take note that Christianity in the
sub-continent is almost 2000 years old. If one is to insist that
Christianity is of foreign origin because Jesus Christ was born in
present day Israel, one must also insist that Guru Nanak of Sikhism
was born in present day Pakistan, and Gautama Buddha in present day
Nepal; and Parsis came from Iran. Besides, the tribals in the North
East have never been exposed to Hinduism. There was no point in
Indian history when every individual followed Hinduism. Any attempt
to rewrite history that India has always belonged to the Hindus will
be based on concoction of history. Christians must resist religious
bully with pen and truth.
It
is high time that everyone realises that Christianity is here to
stay. Jesus Christ was born in a hostile political environment. The
Roman empire, however, could not keep him buried in the tomb; the
tomb lies empty. Tertullian in the third century says that the blood
of the martyrs is the seed of the church. History has proved the
words right. Whether it is the might of the state or the jaw of the
lion, the church is the kind that does not crack under persecution.
The church means no harm to anyone; the church prays and works for
truth and peace to prevail!
(This article appears in The Hornbill Express on 15th December, 2015)
This is a
comparison between Dr. Manmohan Singh, the outgoing PM of India and
Mr. Narendra Modi, the incoming PM of India. The comparison is just
my observation; and it is based on when the two gentlemen begins
their assignment as the Prime Minister of the country. If we take the
overall parameters, Mr. Narendra Modi fares better than Dr. Manmohan
Singh. Dr. Singh performed very well as the Finance Minister of
India, but as a Prime Minister he did not perform so well. My view is
that had UPA II placed someone like P. Chidambaram as the PM, who
delivers, Congress would not have fared this bad in the recently
concluded election.
Many Christians and Muslims are not quite confident about their well-being under Modi as the Prime Minister. Even if Modi himself or the top leadership team of the BJP are not communal or may not endorse communal politics, there is the fear that the foot soldiers of the Sangh Parivar would have a free hand in harming the religious minorities by doing un-constitutional and unlawful action. The fear is not without any reason. Even when Vajpayee was the Prime Minister there were instances when the Sangh Parivar tried to disturb communal harmony by doing certain unlawful activities. And if media report is to be trusted, Vajpayee is more secular than Modi. So when things were not quite secular all the time under Vajpayee, under Modi situation could be worse.
During the time when Vajpayee was the Prime Minister, the then Human Resource Development Minister Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi had allowed Sangh Parivar to bring in non-secular ideology to the textbooks; he also filled key positions in academic enterprise with those who are committed to saffronisation of the academia. Again there are secular intellectual figures who have expressed their fear about such thing being repeated in case Modi comes to power.
There is no doubt that Modi would be a better administrator than Manmohan Singh. Modi may also be quite market friendly. However, if members of Sangh Parivar are not reined in, the plus points of Modi will be overshadowed by the ill-effects of the work of the Sangh Parivar. After all what is left of India if the secular nature of the state is undermined. One of the best things that India could give as lesson to the world is its secular character. And no political party or political figure should bring harm to this beautiful political arrangement. If Modi is the man, so be it. But let him defend and demonstrate secularism.
Some 77 people have died in the recent Bodo-Muslim conflict in Assam. The Muslims who have died are believed to be illegal migrants from Bangladesh. I have no idea what must be done to address the reason for the conflict once and for all. But I do not want bloodshed to continue. And what is unfortunate is that the conflict seems to be spreading to other parts of the country.
It is important to know that entire North East is not just Assam. There are eight states in the North East ( i.e including Sikkim). The conflict between Bodo-Muslim is confined to Assam alone. What is happening in Burma is again different. There are many indigenous Muslims (around 100,000!) in Manipur, the state I come from. Attacking people from the North East, say the Nagas & Manipuris, as a revenge for the Bodo-Muslim conflict in Assam or Buddhist- Muslim conflict in Burma is not a wise thing to do. You cannot attack any person from South India just because, say, there is a conflict between Hindus and Muslims in Kerala or Karnataka.
Won't it be more appropriate to show solidarity with the fellow Muslims by providing the affected people shelter or clothes? That I think would be more in line with the Islamic teaching. Or perhaps helping the Muslims to have better infrastructure there in Bangladesh itself will be more helpful to the Muslims as well as to others. Random attack on North East people or creating a riot like scenario would not help the cause of Islam. It will rather result in creating bad impression of Islam.
21/8/12
The way the NE people fled Bangalore, Pune, Hyderabad etc indicate that they do not really feel fully secure outside of their states. It was not just rumours but real attacks though sporadic have taken place. The Central govt as well as state governments and many local people promised help to the NE people in such they receive threats. Such assurances did not help much. This indicates that the people did not really feel secure. I won't want to criticise the NE people for feeling insecure. I think people should feel sorry for their insecurity rather than criticising them for feeling insecure easily.
But the incident also bring out something very important for India's security. And if India wants to prevent such kind of things in future, connecting NE with the rest of the country better is the key to solving the predicament. For many parents in the NE when their children have gone to study "in India", they have gone out into the unknown part of the world. All this exodus would not have been this way had Nehru not systematically kept NE as buffer zone. If the parents in this region can think about their child going for study like those parents in Punjab who would have sent their child to study in Bangalore, such exodus would not have arisen. Well, let bygones be bygones. Can the Govt do something more concrete for the NE states now? To proof that it is doing something we want to see that political instability in the region is being sorted out in the region first. And to sort our the political conundrum, I suggest that the political right of each ethnic group/community should be given due recognition/respect. Stop using 'political jugaar' as a quick fix solution. As long as right of a community/ethnic group is undermined, courtesy 'political jugaar', this conundrum will emerge over and over again.
I am not writing this as one who hates you or who wishes that someone bad come upon you. As much as you love to do right, I love it too.
It is oftentimes hard to digest criticisms specially one is strongly convinced that one has been wronged all these years and one’s life is dedicated to put these wrongs to right. If someone comes to you and says to that what you are actually doing is perpetuating violenceand thusends up destroying more lives rather than put things to right, I think you would not like to listen to such people.But forgive my audacity for I am going to do exactly that.
I grew up hearing all the legendary stories of some of you. I also grew up hearing that “ Freedom” is round the corner and once that is achieved everybody will be happy; nobody will be unemployed and nobody will ever harassed us. I hear from the older generation that they too grew up hearing such stories. I also learnt that some of you are so sacrificial that some groups can even tame the wildest kids.
However, we are here now. The situation is as bad as it can be. What have you/we achieved? Nothing. How is the moral character of your armed cadres? Not appreciated. People have gone ahead, yet your or rather our people are struggling with petty things. All these years of fighting have killed so many people; so many parents have lost their children. And all this for some kind of “freedom” which will never come true.
True freedom does not come with having gained some kind of control over certain territory. I don’t think it is feasible to gain such territorial freedom because, firstly, the civil society is divided whether to remain part of India or not, and secondly, India is not going to give in to such demand. But suppose the people are united and India is willing to concede to such demand, how are you/we going to run the economy? Political freedom without economic freedom is not freedom at all. You cannot run a country with starving and homeless citizens. It is for this reason that I prefer to remain in India.
Some of you are Christian, some Hindu, some Muslimand some pagan. But does your religion teach you to use violence to fight for you cause? Even if there is difference of opinion whether to remain in India or otherwise, I would expect you all to fight for your cause without employing guns.I don’t think most people of the world appreciate what you are doing. Yet most people, if not all, would appreciate freedom fighters like Mahatma Gandhi or Dalai Lama or Nelson Mandela. Aren’t they consider to be statesmen the world over?
I am a Christian, and I could never understand how it is possible to use the name of Christ to fight for a cause which some of you are fighting for.
You think that you cannot live together with India. But since you are not able to live together with your own people: people who speak the same language, eat the same food, wear the same kind of clothes, worship the same deity etc. this argument does not hold. Count the number of your own people you have killed. This shows that living together is something that we have to learn; it is not something that comes to us naturally. Whether it is my own tribesman or whether the person from a distant land one must learn the virtue of loving and respecting others. If one will not do that but remain stubborn tin thinking we are the only ‘good’ people, there will be no peace and acceptance even within the same ethnic group/tribe/village. Isn’t that the reason why there is so much of bloodshed within your own peoples group. Ahoms against Ahoms; Bodos against Bodos; Kukis against Kukis; Meeteis against Meeteis; Nagas against Nagas; Tripuris against Tripuris. Some of your brothers and sisters have gone ahead in accepting others; they have gone on even to marry Indian or other Asians or even European/American. These brothers and sisters travel, work, live and prosper with others. While you are into killing even your own people, let alone mixing with others. As long as human society is there on earth differences will not go away, but one has to live with that. I just don’t think it is right to use guns to assert one’s otherness. There are thousand of ways to do that. But the more important thing, I think, is to find ways to be in unity and peace in truth with those others around me. And this pursuit in truth cannot lead to the kind of bloodshed that I find in our beautiful North East.
I have more to say but as we sustain the dialogue, or monologue, should I say? I shall bring out some more points. The scare with many people is that speaking out some factual matters lead to bitterness that ultimately result in silencing them forever. Since there has been occasions when those who speak out views different from yours have been silenced forever, I shall take this lesson of history seriously. There are people I know very well, and whom I believe have much wisdom to share to us all, who have chosen silence on the matter, instead of saying anything against your view, because they believe you or your disciples will put a bullet in their head if they open their mouth. But ultimately it’s you and us all included who are poorer by their silence. Alas, it’s guns…
I have tried to read up the social and political history for the sustained functioning of militancy/terrorism in various parts of India. Whether it’s the crisis in Jammu & Kashmir or Assam or the effort to tackle the menace of Naxalism or Khalistan or even the political imbroglio of the Nagas/Mizos/Bodos/Tripuris or the elimination of the the dreaded Veerapan, I have no doubt that the most complex situation is that of Manipur. The Meetei civil society as well as the insurgents will not quite agree to the demand of the Nagas; and the Nagas in general will not give in to the demand of the Kukis. The Kukis are not in good terms with the Paites or say UNLF. Each ethnic group needs to support their underground brothers or the other ethnic group will bully the one that does not have the support of the gun wielding young men and women. Without NSCN Meeteis will bully the Nagas, and there is no doubt about that in the mind of every Naga; and the same applies to the Meeteis. Even each politician must have at least one militant group as their benefactor, whether it’s during election or after that. Some politicians will have multiple militant groups as their protector. But without such support from gun wielding brethren they cannot survive in politics. And for the support every politician must shell out couple of lakhs each year. Even businessmen are not spared.
In social and political matrix of Manipur it is very difficult to decipher which individual or community do not have a stake in the flourishing of small scale militant industry. Everybody is deep into it. The Church and the bureaucracy too have a stake. After all each individual in the church or bureaucracy is made up of individual who belongs to a particular ethnic group.
On the other hand it is the politicians who are against the withdrawal of Armed Forces Special Powers Act, the Act that gives power even to non-commissioned officer to shoot anyone on mere suspicion so as to maintain public law and order. For a politician it does not matter if all the underground groups are killed provided the group that protects him is kept happy. But in the whole process some members of politicians protectors will also get killed. But that’s the way it has to be. Because withdrawal of the Act will make things chaotic.
Each politician who comes to power will try to keep CBI away as the entry of CBI will unlock all the connections—the involvement of every politician in corruption and the siphoning off of money to the militants. Oftentimes money that are meant for development will be shared between a local politician, militants and bureaucrats. No wonder every politician, every senior militants and every bureaucratic will have big buildings and big cars and big belly. The Imphal that was 20 years back is long gone. If there is any city has gone worse from bad in all 20 years then it must be Imphal. Other cities get better and better each decade whereas for Imphal it’s the other way round.
I don’t have any expectation from the government. Nor do I expect the Church to bring any change. I don’t have any expectation from the existing NGOs either. Even Christian NGOs are equally bad like any other (or should I say equally good!) Didn’t they say that God works through us! Well, there is no one through whom God can work. Because there is no one… or rather because God has forsaken it!
The derivative of the word politics is polis which means cities, and the word ‘police’ and ‘polite’ are also derived from the same root word. Broadly speaking, politics then is the process by which people make decisions to govern the citizens of city-state. There is nothing wrong, therefore, in being in political game. To make wise decisions that in effect transforms the lives of thousands of people has to be a virtuous act. If we understand politics in such manner Christian engagement with politics is indispensable and inevitable. Politics, however, has often been narrowly understood and so it used to mean some cunning scheme devised to gain some unjustified end. It seems to me that before we venture into redeeming politics itself, we first need to redeem the definition!
As of now the political system in our society has become so dirty that it seems an impossible task making effort to get it rid of the corruption. Has it become the den of thieves and robbers? The way money power decides the outcome of election instead of the manifesto, the tall promises of the local politicians without the obligation to fulfill them, the diversion of funds meant for the construction of roads and bridges by the ministers to their personal bank accounts, bribery in appointment of different posts in different departments… The list can go on. Seeing the way the elected leaders are governing the city-state, I think, in most people the urge to clean up the system gets punctured.
As Christians, I would argue, that instead of distancing oneself from the political system we need to actively engage in it. We need to engage as citizens of the land, and some even as political leaders. Jesus ministry to transform the society is a political engagement. If we understand Jesus as showing concern only for immaterial entity of human being, and not for the transformation of the peoples-societies-nations (or rather socio-economic-political world) we are not knowing well the Jesus of the Bible. Politicians who cheat, steal, take bribe, and lie need to confronted. In the Bible we read Nathan confronting David, John the Baptist challenging Herod Antipas, Paul appealing to Caesar etc. Even today we can ask our political leaders of their accountability.
Politics is essential for our lives, and Christians must do politics. But what kind of development must it bring? Justice and common good. Justice for all and common good served is the holistic development as followers of Christ we need to pray and work for in our political involvement. Just politicians in a liberal democratic system can do so much to build society, but that is also equally true for its citizens because ultimately every five year every political leader must return to the people to seek their mandate. Church, academic settings, politics – all have tremendous potential to build or destroy people and society. It will not be fair to pit them against one another. To be able to take these different strands and flourish is a hard work, but that is key to progress.
In democratic system can we include even animals and trees in our voter list? Can an elected leader show concern only for those villages who voted for him? Is it wise for entire village to vote for a candidate because she is from the same village? Is the MLA representative of even those villages who did not vote for him? How should we educate the voters about the importance of manifesto? How do we decide which candidates can represent us well in the assembly and speak out for our rights? I think these are some hard questions which particularly students of Political Science should seriously think through, and write and speak out about.
Finally, key to good politics is media. Public moods is best voiced by the newspaper. The newspaper can also express the failures and achievement of the politicians and in effect inform the public of the things happenings. Politicians are much more accountable when there is such a medium like newspaper which can inform the public, and also much more progressive when they are informed of the moods of the public. Sometime back I heard of a newspaper being launched in Senapati. Sad to learn that it shut down because many readers were not willing to pay the bill. We have miles to go before we can day dream!
I am greatly appalled by your audacity to moral police our country. We all know that India is a land of great diversity. Each community living in each state has their own set of culture. The components that make up a culture so often overlap with the components that make up other culture. However, sometimes those components may not overlap. Your Hindutva culture is different from Mizo culture in so many respects. And I am sure you won’t say that Mizo’s culture is less Indian, unless you want to destroy that unity of India. Your culture may prohibit women exercising freedom, but Khasi’s culture will give equal freedom to women , if not more. And if you respect India, you will respect Khasi’s culture. (By the way, Khasis are from Meghalaya). It seems to me that when you force your culture upon us all, you are harming the unity of India.
There are other social issues that you can take up. There is the issue of terrorism, poverty, illiteracy, human trafficking, child labour etc which deserve more attention than the issue you are raising. These are issues that affect the entire nation, and no good citizen will fail to agree that they need to be rectified, though I may say that very few are working to get these things rectified. You have time and energy and manpower. If you all start taking these issues seriously I believe India will truly shine. Not only during election campaign!
Finally, I request you to show more respect to others’ sisters. The ones you humiliate are not your sisters. Just as I don’t want my sister to be mistreated, I am sure you don’t want your sister to be mistreated by stranger. Each girl has parents to discipline. At a different level the police force is there too.
History says that when Nagas came to settle in the land in which they now live there was no one. Since then Nagas have always ‘owned’ the land. With the advent of British things changed.During the zenith of Jadonang’s civil disobedient movement in 1929 in Naga Hills, the Naga Club submitted a historical Memorandum to the Simon Commission in Kohima, in which the Naga Club demanded for excluding them from the proposed ‘Reformed Scheme’ of India and to leave them alone like they were before. When British they left India after 1947 Nagas were is in pretty much disarray, let alone being left alone for self-determination. At present the Nagas have been placed under different administrative units. Most Nagas are in Nagaland. But there is a good number in Manipur and Myanmar too. Assam and Arunachal Pradesh also house Nagas. In 1952 India sent its military might to crush the Nagas public demand. Things became so bad in 1954. With the passing of time crack developed among the Naga leaders. In 1956 T.Sakhrie was murdered for having cooperation with the Indian union and anti-NNC activities. Unfortunately, this sort of killing of political opponent has been a matter of reality till recently. Today Nagas are divided over whether to remain in the Indian union or secede. Politician like S C Jamir, who is the governor of Maharashtra, would prefer to remain as part of Indian union whereas Th. Muivah, General Secretary of NSCN, would prefer otherwise. Both of them think that they are doing what they do for the welfare of the Nagas. Though there is difference of opinion on the matter, I don’t think any single Naga have doubts about the fact that Nagas have the right to be outside of the Indian union. The question, however, is what good will the right bring to us if we are granted this right. Since this Naga problem is as old as present India itself, I think it’s important for Indian civil society to realise that Nagas will never accept the present situation. Even if one party agrees the other party will never agree. India will continue to bleed if the political issue is left unadressed. However, I believe that if the Nagas, at least those who are in India, are brought under one administrative unit, the secessionists would also be willing to lay down their arms. This does not mean that all Nagas migrate to Nagaland. It rather means that the land in which Nagas have been living for ages merge with the present Nagaland. I am not sure if this analogy would capture the sentiment of the Nagas. What would Malayalees in general feel if Palakkad is to be included in Tamil Nadu? Or what would Tamilians in general feel if Kanyakumari is included in Kerala? And what would people living in the particular districts feel if there was such a transaction? I don’t understand why this should be hard for Government of India or government of Manipur or Assam or Arunachal Pradesh to understand or bring some feasible solution. To my Naga brothers and sisters, I would also urge that Sadar Hills be given allowed to be formed, may be with some redrawal of boundaries or give and take between villages. After all, the earth is the Lord’s (Ps 24:1). Even if Nagas came to settle first, as Christian charity, let Kukis also be given land to build homes and prosper.
