It is good that the Coordinating Committee on Manipur Integrity (COCOMI) had chosen to withdraw the ‘public emergency’ which they announced in the wake of the civilian deaths in Koutruk and Moirang as a result of drone bombing and missile attacks by Kuki militants in the last few days. The CSO conglomerate argued that the general public and no individual is safe after the said incidents and the best precautionary measure is to remain indoors. What a defeatist logic, we thought as they announced the so-called public emergency.
Whatever name they chose to give it, public emergency is nothing but another version of bandh or public curfew as a form of protest which had become a sort of self-inflicted violence without much nuisance value in the evolving protest culture of present times. Rather, it results in dulling the sense of protest energy among the general population or expression of public angst instead of invigorating it. History has its lessons. The June 18 uprising would have never happened had the CSOs of Manipur continued with the bandh in protest against the infamous Bangkok declaration of ceasefire without territorial limits on June 14, 2001.
Three days, Manipur shut itself out in protest and on June 18, the public rose with a fury never seen before resulting in burning of the state assembly and storming of CM bungalow leading to the martyrdom of 18 valiant citizens and the birth of a movement never seen before. The widespread protests shook the very foundation of the BJP-led government at the Centre which ultimately resulted in rolling back the infamous phrase ‘without territorial limits’ from the Bangkok agreement between Government of India and NSCN (IM). As time flies and lessons learnt, by whatever name one chose to call it, public shutdowns had never been an effective form of protest.
So, there was simply no sense in calling a shutdown to protest the violence perpetrated by Kuki militants on the valley populations and the failure of STATE in ensuring the securing the lives and properties of the general public. Even if one remains indoors, the drone bombs and missiles could fall anywhere in the street and in our homes. Hiding would not solve the threat to our security unless the STATE acts in a resolute way. There was a time when our elders used to advise the younger not to venture out of home and remain within the perimeter of one’s residence to avoid unseen forces of violence. But nowadays, even the homes are not safe. This, our CSOs failed to perceive.
But anyway, it is good that the public emergency had been withdrawn and the general public had been given an option to choose its own path of protest. Also, there is a strong undercurrent against the public stances of some CSOs who seem to align themselves with the political survival of a particular leader and party with regard to the present turmoil. Certain sections have begun to question why some CSOs are calling for the resignation of the security advisor and DGP only, when the whole state has gone to the dogs. Leading CSOs and women groups besides some self-appointed public commentators should understand that the ultimate decision lies with the chief minister.
As we said before, whether he is willing to assert his authority as the leader of the people and state or continue dancing to the tune of central leaders, this question has to be asked of him. If he indeed asserts his authority, there would be no place for either the security advisor or the present DGP in the state. Again, if he honestly feels that his leadership is essential to the protection of Manipur’s integrity and survival of the indigenous communities, the post of chief minister is not that essential for him to lead the people.
