In poll-bound Manipur, the economic blockade imposed by the United Naga Council has emerged as a major poll issue and has left the people of the hills and the valley sharply divided. The opposition BJP has accused Chief Minister Okram Ibobi Singh of the Congress of using the blockade for political gain. Manipur’s Deputy CM and Home Minister Gaikhangam talks to Anando Bhakto about the economic blockade, bifurcation of the hill districts and more.
Q. The United Naga Council (UNC) has declared that it will intensify the blockade enforced on two national highways NH2 and NH37, the lifelines of the state. Are you confident enough that people will come out to vote and the electoral process will go on without hindrance?
A: We are sure people will come out in large numbers to exercise their voting right. The economic blockade called by the United Naga Council is unconstitutional, inhuman and anti-national. In a democratic country like ours, everybody has the right to express their views and dissent, but you cannot hold people to ransom. All right thinking citizens should condemn this kind of blockade. People, however, are ready to exercise their franchise. In previous elections also, these underground elements had issued heavy threats and intimidation to people to not cast their votes. The United Naga Council is a mouthpiece of NSCN(IM) and this bandh is sponsored directly and indirectly by NSCN(IM).
Q. The Chief Minister has said that since the Central government is in peace talks with the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Isak-Muivah) or NSCN(IM), they can easily put pressure on the UNC to call off the economic blockade. Are you trying to shift blame on the BJP for your failure to stop the blockade?
A: I endorse what the Chief Minister has said. We keep on requesting the Centre to intervene in this blockade, because this is directly sponsored by the NSCN(IM) who are in talks with the Central government. The NSCN(IM) is also violating some of the ground rules that were laid down for the talks, so we are requesting the Centre to intervene by taking action against the people who are flouting the ground rules. The Centre should be serious enough and also honest enough to take up the issue.
Q: But UNC general secretary Milan Shimray thinks otherwise. He has alleged that your government does not want peace and has failed to uphold past assurances about the Naga’s land. He cited the example that in November last year, the Ministry of Home Affairs had convened a tripartite meeting, but the Manipur government didn’t send its representative. According to him, the Congress government in the state wants the situation to go on. Your comments?
A: This is something funny. Let me make very clear that there is no land that particularly belongs to the Nagas or Meiteis or Kukis. The land belongs to the state; it belongs to all of us. So, when they say that the land belongs to the Nagas, it is totally unfounded. Also, to say that the government does not want peace or the normalcy to return is totally wrong. The Chief Minister is the head of the state, and like the head of a family, he will never want to see his house in disorder. We want lasting peace, tranquility, unity and development.
Regarding the tripartite talks, they were simply a “communication gap”. The state government received information about that meeting on that very same day when it was supposed to take place. So, there was no time for us to go. This time again the Central government invited us to participate in the proposed talks, and we have sent two of our senior most officials of the state to join the talks in New Delhi.
The state government, on its part, wants the ongoing blockade to end at any cost, that is why we invited several times the UNC to participate in a dialogue, but they didn’t agree.
Q: Your government’s recent decision to bifurcate several of the hill districts in Manipur—which has sharply divided the state’s three main communities, Meiteis, Nagas and Kukis—has met with resistance, particularly by the tribes who fear the bifurcation would result in encroachment of their ancestral lands. Has this been done to boost the party’s image among the decisive Meitei voters and thwart anti-incumbency?
A: Nothing of this sort. This decision was taken purely on the basis of administrative conveniences, and to deliver quick development in far flung areas. You would appreciate the fact that the demand to break the four districts has a history of 40 years. So, the decision was not abrupt. After thorough consultations, we decided that the bifurcation was in the best interest of the state and its people. This decision will not hamper the existing unity among the people as everybody is happy with this decision, except a handful who have a biased view in the matter, and who want to disrupt peace.
Q: The BJP has alleged that the new districts were created without ensuring adequate infrastructure in place. Your comments?
A: This is a mere allegation. Even when we attained full-fledged statehood, we were under obligation to do more. It takes time to achieve full development. But the basic requirements are there and there will be no problem at all in matters of running the administration.
Q: The Congress has suffered some setbacks in recent months, with five of its MLAs joining the BJP. An opinion poll in October also said that the BJP could win 31-35 seats in the 60-member Assembly while Congress’ share may plummet to 19-24 seats. How do you respond to that?
A: This is ridiculous. We will 100% form the government for the fourth consecutive time with an absolute majority. The BJP, with due respect to the party, will not cross two digits in Manipur. Mark my words, they will get four or five seats, not more. They are making a lot of noise, but it is a case of empty vessels making much noise.