While many CSOs in the valley are asking for disqualification of the Kuki-Zo legislators for seeking a separate administration within Manipur, Kuki-Zo based CSOs are accusing the Meitei legislators of succumbing to the demands of the Arambai Tenggol pledging loyalty to it. While nobody seems to question as to how the Kuki-Zo legislators lent their signatures to various statements detrimental to peace and integrity of the state, including that of seeking separate administration or centrally administered region or whatever and how they absented themselves from attending the state assembly session, the Kuki-Zo brotherhood decries the act of Meitei legislators which was hyped by certain sections in the national media who loves to hate the ‘majority’ Meiteis.
Well, there is a difference between what Meitei legislators did at Kangla and their Kuki-Zo counterparts did from places beyond. While some would say that the Meitei legislators were ‘coaxed’ into presenting themselves at Kangla and appending their signatures to the declaration, it was very much in the public domain. On the other hand, nobody knows the circumstances which made the Kuki-Zo legislators give their signature to the controversial demands and statements.
Nobody knows whether all of them willingly gave their signatures or they were forced. The two ministers among them are still functioning through e-office. All of them are drawing their monthly salaries and allowances. Except for a few diehards, most of them sought leave of absence on health grounds from attending the most recent assembly session even with the threats from Kuki-Zo organisations.
That being said, we now need to analyse the fate of other demands put forth in the Kangla declaration. Of the remaining five demands, we shall take up two demands regarding abrogation of SoO and removal of Assam Rifles from the state which are related to the overall security architecture installed by central government in the northeastern sector which is very much related to the overall security architecture.
Well, one must understand that despite political exigencies it is difficult for even a powerful political leadership to override security and geo-political considerations. Despite the promise of revoking the draconian Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) from Manipur and other NE states, it took many years for the Narendra Modi government to finally convince the defence lobby. The government had removed AFSPA entirely from Meghalaya and partially from Arunachal Pradesh.
In March, 2018, the MHA ordered removal of AFSPA from several areas in the Northeast. In the case of Manipur, AFSPA had been lifted from only 15 police stations, including the six within the Greater Imphal area. Then, nine more police stations including Sekmai, Lamsang, Bishnupur, Patsoi, Lamlai, Irilbung, Thoubal, Kakching and Jiribam all in the valley districts were excluded from AFSPA operations.
The Act remains in force in all the hill districts irrespective of whether it adjoins the international boundary. The same set of defence principles work in the case of abrogation of SoO with Kuki militants or of removing Assam Rifles from the state. The central forces or security forces continue to hold dear to the SoO agreement which they had painstakingly crafted. The SoO agreement was first signed between the central government and the Kuki militant outfits brought under two umbrella organisations and it was only later on that the state government was brought into the picture and hence, the tripartite agreement.
So, the defence lobby would not bog down so easily to any kind of effort to abrogate it. It is the same in the case of removing Assam Rifles from the state. It is because the central government and the security establishment looks at every crisis in the region through the prism of security only. Sadly, it has been like that throughout decades of independence in the region. Even the aspects of planning process and development intervention are screened through this prism.
