 |
| A Manipur Protest |
What is it about men who see fit to poke a barrel into young chests without apparent emotion, and with this single act, alienating them from the democratic process, inflicting anguish and injustice? More importantly, what keeps those who claim to understand the situation fully well from diluting the quagmire with real solutions and not blinkered laws? An India that never falters to raise allegations of cross-border terrorism and undemocratic functioning at a neighbouring country becomes the proverbial ostrich, ducking its head into voluntary ignorance, hoping its own grave domestic problem will just go away.
The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act has become a dirty word in media speak. No longer is its futility shrouded by the official line on perceived perpetual security threats in the North East and Jammu and Kashmir. Yet, the process of ironing out the security concerns in order to do away with the Act and put into place a semblance of normal life has few takers in the government or public discourse. The issue has largely been relegated to some episodes of archival or documentary material on the evening news or boxed items on an obscure page of the ‘National’ section. Thus, it isn’t rocket science to guess that an average Joe wouldn’t be able to make sense of the bulk of antecedents to the issue.
The story of AFSPA takes on a double trajectory in two regions of the country synonymous with civil conflict and governance anomalies. Introduced in September 1958 to the “disturbed areas” of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura, it was later extended to Jammu and Kashmir in July 1990. In its alacrity to quell insurgent voices, the Indian government has blurred its ability to discern between what can be termed as a ‘national threat’ and what simply an exercise of basic free speech is. One does not seek to dissect the ideological stand of various separatist groups in both parts of the country with as much gusto as making an appeal in the name of those caught in the crossfire. Granted, the crushing squalor of a few thousand mothers or the existentialist angst of young blood may seem paltry pitted against the billions worth of trade and infrastructure development; but as children, we are taught the vitality of dealing with problems head on, instead of sitting on them to exacerbate them irreparably.
 |
| Irom Sharmila |
The watermark of Gandhi is the most circulated image in the country. But are his values hollow and uninteresting to a nation that never knew him beyond school exams? Was textbook Satyagraha never the pivot of our freedom movement? Irom Sharmila Chanu was 28 when she realized what never hits many of us in an entire lifetime- that resolution to act doesn’t have a doctrine or an ideology discrete from righteousness. Her unparalleled 10 year-long fast would put Mr. Gandhi to shame but it doesn’t seem to move Delhi at all. It all boils down to this one simple fact- how would one feel if ones colony or city or state was under constant surveillance? Wouldn’t it pinch to be stopped and checked at every turning? Wouldn’t the occurrence of all this on an everyday basis frustrate one to the point of madness? Why is it then, so difficult for those in power to realise that the prolonged imposition of this Act or at least certain sections of it breeds further unrest? The unbridled rage and anguish of the 30 women who protested in front of the Assam Rifles Headquarters with banners of “Indian Army rape us too” after Manorama Devi’s raped and tortured body was found in a ditch is nowhere near being appeased. If security concerns are to be met, those in power need to separate it from civil life in a permanent and non-interfering manner. The people have cried themselves hoarse for long enough. If another security ‘concern’ takes shape in the near future, the answer to whose fault it is wouldn’t be difficult to answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment