The Zomis, or any organisation in which they play a substantial part, call a bandh and the Kukis and/or the Hmars stand up against it. Similarly, the Kukis or the Hmars would face the same heat should they evoke the same curse. Is there any need to recall that, of late, the security forces had to come out, let off a few rounds of blank fire, and restore order?
I think you get the point. So, I need not tell more folly stories of ours.
Do I say folly? Are we really foolish? Nah! Never! We are way too wise, rather. Then, are we just pawns in the grander chessboard of God for our...um...spiritual salvation? Or are we playing into the hands of evil schemers or machinations of state agencies? The King of France said to Joan of Arc when she started seeing visions, “The eye sees what the mind wants to see!” Hmm! What did our minds want to see in our state of affairs?
The saying, ‘Truth hurts’ is said not without a reason. Gloria Steinem has aptly remarked, “The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.” We have many truths to prove wrong. One of them is the curious case of divine tribal discord. The myth of tribal unity has to be busted. Can we do it? Or do we want to?
You need not seek far for the genesis of the hill people’s discord. In fact, the seed was sown with the coming of Christianity. I don’t mean they are harmonious before that. Remember, they are headhunters. They are proud of it. And they swear by it till today. But, Christianity brought them, along with the light of the gospel, the glowing rays of politics.
By insisting, or trying to trace a common origin, we are working against the order of nature. Perhaps, God has never meant us to integrate when he dumped us in this hellhole of the world. We are the scum, the ‘what left’ of fine humanity God has decided to put in better places. Our own sires had a maxim that says, “Leftover rice cannot be lumped together”. We must respect our ancient wisdom and try not to unite lest we incur divine wrath. Try as we might, we’ll never do it. Rather, we are going against God’s blueprint. Do our minds want to see?
Religion, in fact, is the first to teach us the art of dissension, envy, disunity. The first missionaries in Manipur were from the American Baptist Mission stationed at Ukhrul. These missionaries were a jealous lot. They copyrighted their commission. They not only got the Maharajah’s permission to preach, but persuaded him to allow no other missionaries to operate within the princedom. But they can’t go strong enough to even penetrate the valley of Imphal. Their counterparts based in Tedim, Burma, were not as strong either. Consequently, the south district of Manipur was left unreached.
Then, a group of missionaries broke in from Mizoram. They pitched their tent at Senvawn village. Several families, of whom were few Christians, also migrated into the Tuithaphai valley and joined up the Thahdo Kuki Pioneer Mission (TKPM).
The Ukhrul proselytisers were in no way pleased to hear the news. They poisoned the king’s ears, and immediately set him on the path of persecution. Unable to put up with it, the south evangelists dragged the king (and the north brethrens) to court. The suit settled with a delineation of operational boundaries for the missionaries.
The seed of tribal discord is has taken roots.
TKPM changed to North East India Pioneer Mission (NEIPM). During that time, trouble arose in the ranks of the Mission due to non-payment of its workers. The workers’ representatives and that of the Home Board—its General Secretary Mr. H. H. Coleman and two others—could not come to an agreement. Cracks begin to show. Consequently, H. K. Dohnun, Field Superintendent of Lakhipur station and Field Director Watkin Roberts founded the Independent Church of India (ICI).
Taking cue from this break-off, the Hmars take themselves separate from their tribal compatriots in every walks of life ever since. No wonder they rejected the idea of common nomenclature like Kuki, Mizo or Zomi. They prefer to be a lone ranger!
The eye sees what the mind wants to see! Now, don’t tell me the crow is not white!
The ‘all the rest’ did not remain intact for long. The Paites broke away in 1950 and formed the Manipur Christian Convention (MCC) which later became Evangelical Convention Church (ECC) and even later Evangelical Baptist Convention Church (EBCC). Other communal groups followed suit. The Vaipheis created Manipur Christian Organisation (MCO), the Hmars called themselves ‘Assembly’, the Gangtes ‘Synod’, and the Thados ‘Kuki Christian Association’ (KCA).
Then followed denominational fragmentation to become foreign matter in the eyes of future inter-communal concord. For instance, splinter groups flaked off ECC like Baptist Church of Manipur (further sub-fragmenting into Chin Baptist Association), Church of Christ, Roman Catholic, 7th Day Adventists, Evangelical Mission Church, New Testament Baptist Church, Manipur Gam Presbytery (further splintered into Zomi Christian Church), Evangelical Lutheran Church, Presbyterian Church in India, etc.
According to Upa Luaizakham, the then Secretary of Vangai Prebytery, in his book Nidanglai Hinkhua leh Tuni 1989. P. 14: NTBC was formed even when they were under NEIG Mission long before ECC was born. This group, as the author has to say, was moulded with political contours and they tied up with the Alipur Mission. Fellowship Evangelical Baptist Church peeled off from this association.
Our religious belief and spiritual wellbeing have direct bearing upon our social life. Deny this fact. The eye sees what the mind wants to see. The ground for future turmoil is laid.
Religion is the mother of all politics. The more religious you are, the more political, the more bigoted you become. Separate the two and you are taking the fish out of water. Even the President of America swore with a hand on the Bible. Therefore, every shade of political malady can be directly or indirectly traced to religion, the churches in our context. The game of politics was played on the altars of churches.
Don’t you say the crow is white!
Christianity reinforced and complemented, rather than supplanted, the sense of distinct ethnicity and otherness. Separatist groups such as the Naga National Council (NNC) and the MNF laced their separatist rhetoric with free use of Biblical imageries—and the MNF even its military operations (e.g., its first uprising on 28 February 1966 was referred to as ‘Operation Jericho’). Muivah was quick to see that most of its leaders and fighters were devout Christians, and that religion and ethnicity could complement each other to foment separatism. He even coined the phrase ‘Nagaland for Christ’ and the slogan boldly hangs over the churches in the NSCN camps where Sunday services were regularly held.
MNF chief Laldenga, after becoming Chief Minister of Mizoram, snubbed the church when it started pressuring to ban sale of alcoholic drinks because he did not want to lose one of the most important sources of revenue for his government. The Congress took advantage and proclaimed in its election manifesto its commitment to promote “Christian Socialism” in Mizoram. The MNF was defeated in the ensuing elections in 1989 with the church’s support. After Laldenga’s death, Zoramthanga took over as party president and repaired the party’s relation with the church, assuring the church leaders of his commitment to continue with the prohibition. The MNF regained victory.
On a larger perspective, religion is used to justify the colonial rule and encourage separatist tribalism.
The colonisers and the Christian missionaries taught the newly emergent (tribal) leaders that they were ‘backward’ and should accept the colonial rule as beneficial. The missionaries thus taught the people that they were ‘savages’ and should accept new concepts of Christian ethics and western values without even examining whether there was anything of permanent value in the culture and traditions of tribal society. Every new convert was obliged to abandon his old faith and habits, and most crucially, change his mental outlook. They began to look with disgust their own cultures. The young men felt ashamed of their past, their way of living, their tradition and culture. They also felt that the Western people and their so-called civilising mission had brought them into the ‘light’ and make them ‘civilised’. What is significant...is that the Christian missionaries educated the people and trained native workers who began to regard themselves as belonging to a more or less different category...thereby disturbing the traditional social organisational structure and ...effecting the economic interests of the traditional leaders.
Also, tribalism, good or bad, ensures ethnic loyalty which in its turn, provides for the tribal people, a sense of their identity and the values of their culture and tradition. At the same time, it also provides a material basis for political and socio-religious separatist movements. Even church organisations are based on tribal lines. The whole tragedy with most of the tribal Christians is that ethnic loyalty often transcends their commitment to Christianity.
NK Thang, Chaplain, Kuki Worship Service, Kolkata asserted that division among the Kukis prevailed due to the presence of multi-dialect, narrow understanding, clannishness, denominationalism and church-organisational chauvinism. This instrument of organised leadership has different plans and motives. He further states that politicians are election-minded leaders who are interested only in position and power and their role in fostering unity can only be marginal.
Now that our churches are run on lingo-communal lines, the case of tribal discord is securely toughened. The Indian government has long implemented the instrument of division by according the tribal people constitutional recognition on linguistic basis. Now, every linguistic-tribe is competing to reap the most benefits from this policy of positive discrimination. For instance, there was once a time most of the southern tribes of Manipur came under the nomenclature of Kuki. Today, the Kuki family has splintered. In fact, the Kukis and the Paites (Zomis) have fought a fratricidal war in 1997-8.
Mr. Thangkhopao Ngaih, IAS (Retd) wondered: We cannot deny the fact that the Thadou speaking community and the Paite speaking community are descendants of the same ancestors. Since it is so, why should we hate one another, even to the extent of committing arson, looting and murder against one another? But I must say that he did not realise what you say and what you are or what you do are completely two different things. Or the senior officer is over passionate to set his eyes on our fierce differences. The eye sees....
The big mistake on the part of every communal group is their demand for linguistic-based recognition by the Indian government. The government has been more than happy to incorporate us in the list of its tribal subjects. It is so easy getting us in the list that we don’t have to call bandhs or struggle for it at all. Rather, it is like the game waking to the hunter even before the hunter goes a-hunting. Long before we are aware, the Indian government has already been pursuing its divide-and-rule policy with the anticipation of political awakening for half a century to come. In fact, the government has unwittingly taken a pre-emptive measure to tackle militancy before its rise. That's prophetically nipping something in the bud! Perhaps, the Nagas asked for the same provision, but they overcame their linguistic differences and successfully rallied behind the obscure name till date. The non-Naga, non-Mizo tribals are yet to do that. I fear they never will!
Sallust says, “Harmony makes small thing grow, lack of it makes great things decay.” It is not easy to make sense out of this statement when the mind wills not to see.
On the political front, tribal movements for statehood, autonomy, homeland and whatnot are doomed to fail unless we devise new policies and approaches. The government is too shrewd to douse the fire of our overlapping claims. It knows that we will not certainly last. One important element of Indian counter-insurgency strategy is the use of drift, the art of tiring down the insurgent leadership through unending negotiations running into more than decades. The Naga demand for sovereignty is a case in point.
The government also play us against each other to wear us out.
Just a day ago, the Kuki State Demand Committee was imposing a shutter-down. Worse, a more intensified economic blockade is kept in store for the days to come. The Union government is yet to start talks with the signatories of SOO. What is the government thinking? Let’s go into the government’s mind.
The government of India has been consistently resorting to the four elements of Kautilyan statecraft in dealing with tribal insurgencies of the northeast. These are: i) Sham—reconciliation through negotiations, ii) Dam—monetary inducements through transfers of federal largesse, iii) Danda—use of force through military operations, and iv) Bhed—split in the rebel ranks.
The military also responded to the northeast insurgency with a three-phased strategy:
i)Prevent and protect: The army gets its bearings on the movement through a mix of ‘area domination’, static guarding of targets (human and material) and ‘cordon and search’ operations intended to segregate the rebels from the people and deny them supplies.
ii)Infiltration and isolation: Involves penetrating rebel groups to generate credible intelligence followed by select counteraction to keep the rebels on the run and the unleashing of propaganda effort to deny the rebels local support.
iii)Attack and finish: Rebel bases and mobile squads are attacked in large numbers and their organisation is split through engineered defections.
In recent years, the army has also started direct deals with rebel groups to play them off against such other groups. Conclusion of the Suspension of Operations (SOO) with Kuki and Zomi militant groups in 2005 is a case in point. These groups were later drafted by the army into operations against Meitei rebel groups like the UNLF. Exploitation of ethnic divisions by the Indian Army and intelligence was not unique to Manipur but the use of the Kuki groups against the UNLF was the most blatant of such cases.
The state government have backed insurgent groups against each other, and the Indian federal intelligence agencies have backed insurgents as part of Delhi’s ploy to settle scores with state governments seen as hostile to the interests of the ruling party at the centre.
The government also offers settlement packages that involve devolution of greater political and administrative autonomy and much greater flow of federal funds for economic development, part of it being siphoned off to rebel coffers to keep them happy, and expressed commitment to promote local culture and interests. During the four decades of guerrilla campaign from 1956-96, Nagaland received nearly 300 billion rupees in federal funds for a population of less than one million. Very few Indian states have received such a huge quantum of federal funds so far.
The government did not let the factional tendencies within the insurgent groups go unnoticed. Rather, it vigorously engineered splits and orchestrated communal tensions to serve its purpose.
The Indian Intelligence agencies quickly capitalised on the internal weakening of the Naga insurgents due to tribal factionalism. In 1968, the Sema leaders of NNC defected to form the Revolutionary Government of Nagaland (RGN) which started cooperating with the Indian security forces. India’s counter-insurgency strategy in Nagaland also involved negotiations with tribal leaders and chiefs to secure the surrender of the guerrillas by exploiting tribal divisions, strengthening of electoral system and pumping in huge quantum of funds into the state aimed at securing the loyalty of the emerging Naga political class, split the NNC by utilising the contacts established during the negotiations in the mid-1960s. In fact, Naga, Mizo, Assamese and other tribal insurgent groups have all ended up split.
The Congress-led Union government had given support to the violent Bodo movement in the 1980s to unsettle the Asom Gana Parishad led Assam government. At the same time, it also backed the tribal insurgents of Tripura to bring down the Bengali-dominated Left government. Currently, it is using the Kuki armed groups to curb the Manipuri insurgents.
When the ULFA refused to give up the path of armed struggle, the Indian intelligence agencies employed mercenaries and surrendered ULFA cadres (SULFA) to attack their leaders like Paresh Barua in foreign countries. Many of its leaders like Swadhinata Phukan were liquidated in prisons or in fake encounters and their close relatives were not spared. The Assam police also used the surrendered militants to hunt down their colleagues in the underground. The SULFA provided the Indian security forces with intelligence on the ULFA and even went to Bhutan to attack them and their relatives and sympathisers like local editor Parag Kumar Das, who had emerged as an ideologue of the rebel movement. In return, the SULFA was provided huge money from ‘secret source funds’ of the army and the intelligence agencies and their leaders were provided with lucrative business deals like control of coal trade on the Assam-Meghalaya border. Many SULFA leaders figure amongst Assam’s new billionaires.
The government also actively supported dissensions by keeping away from the internal strife of the insurgent groups. For instance, the two factions of the NSCN have been observing ceasefire with the Indian government but are fighting freely among themselves. The latest round of infighting erupted in March-April 2007 in which more than a dozen guerrillas of both factions have died. The Indian security forces have made no attempt to stop the fighting even when the rebels used heavy weapons like mortars.
Confucius said, “By gaining the people, the kingdom is gained; by losing the people, the kingdom is lost.”
In many parts of Nagaland, like Phek for instance, citizens upset with the vicious factional feuds have taken the initiative to chase away both rebel factions from their areas. Both factions have accused each other of being ‘Indian agents’ but both have maintained contacts with the Indian security forces and intelligence agencies.
The ULFA began to lose popular support once it started bombing locations in which civilians were killed. When several school children were killed in the northern town of Dhemaji on Indian Independence Day in 2004, public opinion decisively turned against them. Influential sections of Assamese society came out openly against them and even civil society leaders close to the rebels faced severe criticism in the local Assamese media that was once so supportive of their actions.
No insurgent groups can out-stand the might and wiles of Indian military. Even the Naga movement, the longest in the world, has to step down from the demand of ‘sovereignty’ to a mere status of ‘special federal relationship’. The Zomi movement that started strong in the early nineties and even minted its own currency and proposed to break international boundaries has in a couple of decades stooped to ‘Autonomous Tribal State’ within a state.
No government in the Centre is foolish enough to carve out homelands for every tribal group in a state the size of Sri Lanka. How many SOO’s we may conclude, how many talks we may have, how many times we may take to the streets, how much blood we may spill, no political party will offer us the ‘freedom’ we aspire for. Even if we make it, for we may eventually make it with the sacrifice of 95% of our combined population, there would be nobody to populate the new free land and the Indian government would have to step in as caretaker and gradually re-establish its suzerainty all over again.
All the period between this mass sacrifice and recapture of the new homelands, the tribal people will have to go on fighting against one another. And the government agencies will be more than happy to stoke the fires of disunity and communal flare-ups.
If Sigmund Freud said, “Opposition is not necessarily enmity; it is merely misused and made an occasion for enmity,” we have our Mahatma to argue this imported truth. He said: “It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence.” We have been practically agreeing with him since the dawn of tribal national consciousness.
John 8.32 says: “...and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
We have many truths to prove wrong to set us free from the vicious cycle of communal disharmony. We have to will our minds with a pragmatic eye and act prudently. If we still choose to ignore...wait, I think I hear gunshots. Perhaps the Zomis and the Kukis and the Hmars are smarting out their differences again.
This will go on forever...
_____________________________
Bibliography—
Upa Luaizakham, Nidanglai Hinkhua leh Tuni 1989, Chapter II, pp. 106-107, published with financial assistance from Directorate for Tribal and Backward Classes, Govt. of Manipur. [Paraphrased]
Subir Bhaumik, Ethnicity, Ideology and Religion: Separatist Movements in India’s Northeast
Bhaumik, Brothers in Arms, Sunday, 20 June 1987
Congress(I) manifesto for the 1989 Mizoram state assembly elections, issued in Aizawl, Mizoram
Prof. Lal Dena, Emergence of Tribal Middle Class in Manipur: Colonial and Post-Colonial Period
NKThang Haokip, Kuki Worship Service: Towards Community Transformation
Thangkhopao Ngaihte, IAS (Retd), Thupoimohte
Udayon Misra, 2000,the Periphery Strikes Back: Challenges to the Nation-State in Assam and Nagaland, Simla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study
S.C. Dev, Nagaland: The Untold Story, Calcutta, Pear publishers, 1987