All militias in Manipur must give up arms: Mizoram CM
Mizoram CM Lalduhoma said that Manipur CM N Biren Singh was a liability for the state, its people and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Mizoram chief minister Lalduhoma of the Zoram People’s Movement created a buzz in September, when media reports emerged of a speech he had given in the US, of the need to reunify the Zo people’s traditional lands, now split across India, Myanmar and Bangladesh. In an interview with Hindustan Times, the former Indian Police Service officer clarifies that he never meant the creation of a separate nation for the Zo, but a reunification under India’s umbrella. Edited excerpts:
Since this controversy has a historical context, tell us about the background of the Mizo People?
Our forefathers were the indigenous people living in present Mizoram and the adjoining areas covering approximately 145,000 sq km. Each village or town had their own independent chiefs but they were closely knit together by culture, tradition, and customs.
We were annexed with the British empire with formal proclamation from Buckingham Palace. Soon, the British realised that people living in between Burma and India were of the same ethnic group, different from the others, so they decided to give them a separate administrative unit. They conveyed a meeting, the Chin Lushai conference in Fort William, Calcutta in 1892. It was attended by LG Assam, chief commissioner of Assam and Burma, commander in chief Madras, foreign secretary, military secretary, and the quartermaster general in India. They decided there should be a separate administrative unit for these people under the chief commissioner of Assam. So, the unification, right from the beginning, was to be within India. But unfortunately for us, this decision was never implemented. On the contrary, we were divided into three countries –– India, Burma (Myanmar) and then East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).
So, your people wanted to be under India but you were brought under three different governments?
We have never accepted this colonial, and imposed boundary at any stage in our history. The first movement for reunification was led by Mr Laldenga, president of MNF (Mizo National Front). But that was a great blunder. We have paid a heavy price for this. Let me take the advantage of mentioning my personal role. I was in Delhi Police then and looked after the security of Palam airport, VIPs and visiting foreign dignitaries. I had to be with the Prime Minister every morning. For about three years, I was with PM Indira Gandhi day in and day out. She had a strong determination to solve the Mizo problem through negotiation and not by force. One fine morning, she asked me if I would be able to sacrifice my service and become a mediator between Indian government and Mr Laldenga, the exiled leader in London. Immediately after my resignation, I talked to Mr Laldenga and negotiated with him. In 1994, I brought him back to Delhi. Peace talks started, which culminated in signing of memorandum of settlement in 1986. Today, because of the peace agreement with MNF, Mizoram has become the most peaceful and happiest state in the country. I am happy to have made some contribution. After that there was another movement led by Brigadier T Sailo, CM of Mizoram in 1988, which was a U-turn of policy.
The earlier demand was independent from India. But this time, it was reunification of all Zo-ethnic people within India. The first world Zomi conference was held in 1988 and they decided that reunification must be within India. When the British people came, they gave us wrong names. People in Mizoram were called Lushias, in Manipur were called Kukis, in Chin hills, they were called Chins. None of these are our real names. These are generic names given to us. In that conference, it was decided to have a common nomenclature for all of us, so they chose the word Zo –– a nomenclature to refer to any ethnic group, descendants of Zou. The name of the organization was also called Zo Reunification Organization (ZoRO). Till today, they have peacefully participated in this reunification movement.
Tell us about your reunification speech in September, which has been a subject of controversy?
It was a journalist who twisted my speech and portrayed me as a Balkanising force to India’s integrity. One should not allow these misinterpreted narratives to be a subject of national discourse. It is time for national media to build a connection with peripheral people like us, rather than alienating them. That is true in the context of Mizoram that is limping back to normalcy after a decade long insurgency.
How was your speech taken out of context?
The main purpose of my visit to US was to send a message about reunification within India. And I am very categorical about that. I have clearly mentioned that unification has to be within India. I have even gone to extent of saying that if Mizoram were an independent country, it will be very difficult for us. My mission was clear. I have explained everything in detail. The copy of the English version of my speech was there. I was talking about reunification within India. I do not want to say more.
But in your speech you said, Zo people in India, Myanmar and Bangladesh aspire to be united and given today’s geopolitical realities, it may not be far-fetched. How ?
Under the given geopolitical behaviour, coupled with instability of the military junta (in Myanmar), it may not be far-fetched. Circumstances are very favourable and pointing towards this unification. See the displaced people from Myanmar, displaced people from Bangladesh and even people from Manipur. For all of these people India is home. They come to Mizoram. We look after them. The Government of India is very generous with them, treating them well. It is home for all of these people. The sufferings, happenings, may one day become a blessing in disguise. Unification of Zo people within India and Akhand Bharat. These are twin visions.
Just to clarify, when you say reunification of all Zo people within India...
It will be within Mizoram state.
What is your take on the government proposing to build the border fence with Myanmar?
When we are talking about reunification... in principle, they contradict each other. So long as reunification is to be accomplished, there is no question of having a boundary fence.
Are you saying you are against the fencing ?
We are against it. We have to be. How can we have a border fencing when we are talking about reunification? Once we have a border fencing, our brothers and sisters will never look towards us. Forever we will be divided.
What did you tell the Prime Minister and the Union home minister about border fencing when you met them recently?
I discussed with them. They told me the need for this. And I told them it will be against unification and that of Akhand Bharat and it is against the aspiration and sentiment of the people. (But) before fencing, one has to make preparations. Border roads and approach roads to villages have to be constructed. It will take many years. The actual construction of fencing will be much later on. I am not under pressure. It is not an issue now.
The Centre believes a porous border is a nightmare for security agencies because it aids in smuggling of guns, weapons, drugs.
These things could not be stopped despite the Indo-Bangladesh border fence.
Your people share ethnic ties with Manipur. How has the situation in Manipur affected Mizoram?
People in the adjoining areas of Manipur are our brothers and sisters. We have thousands of people coming here whom we are looking after. So, it has direct impact on us. We have to look after that. Meitei don’t come here. But we do have hundreds of Meitei working here in university, college, schools and shops. We have promised them safety. We meet them regularly. Every time something happens in Manipur, we assure them of their safety. Nobody has fled so far.
You don’t anticipate any problem between the Kuki and Meitei here?
No, I don’t.
There were reports that you were willing to talk to tribal people of Manipur to try and solve the problem?
I think I might have been misquoted. I don’t want to interfere in anybody’s business. It is their business. Unless, I am given some mission to do this, I should not interfere.
So these reports are wrong?
There’s no request. The thing is when we had a meeting of Niti Aayog in New Delhi sometime in July, Mr Biren Singh (Manipur CM) had requested me to visit him. At the end of my speech, I announced to the whole audience including PM, HM and all chief ministers that my counterpart has invited me to visit Imphal and I am ready to visit and provide him all assistance at my disposal. Immediately after I finished my speech, Biren Singh came to my table. He shook hands with me. Everybody witnessed that. Later, I discussed with the home minister and asked him whether I should go or not. The HM did not have any objection to me going there. But still my inner voice told me not to go. Till today, I think I have taken the right decision not to go.
Why did Manipur CM invite you?
I do not know what was on his mind. But, later on he denied in his assembly that he did not invite me.
Have you spoken to the Manipur CM since ?
After that we haven’t had a chance to speak.
Did you speak to the PM and HM about the Manipur situation?
After Manipur CM’s invitation, I had asked the honourable HM whether I should go to Manipur or not. That is the only thing I discussed about Manipur with the HM. He has no objection. I have not discussed this with the PM.
As the CM of a neighbouring state, what’s your comment on Biren Singh’s role as CM?
Frankly speaking, I am sorry to say that he is a liability to the state of Manipur. He has been a liability to his own people and his party. Everybody knows the negative contribution made by him in the last LS elections. If his service is still needed, in my opinion, it is a necessary evil. More evil and less necessary.
If you had to advice the Manipur CM, what would you tell him?
I think, there is no point of me giving advice to him. But I have some idea of the solution for Manipur problem that has to be given to the home ministry, if i am asked and not him.
What is the solution?
My suggestion is, all the arms and ammunition held by militias in Manipur should be surrendered. If these people continue keeping all these sophisticated weapons, who knows –– one day they may point their guns at Delhi. That possibility is there. They should be disarmed. All armed groups should be banned. Lastly, there has to be a sincere negotiation with hill leaders.
But the problem is hill leaders (Kuki-Zos) refused to talk to Meitei leaders during the meeting called by MHA?
They may not like to have this discussion in the presence of the chief minister and Meitei leaders. Maybe they want to have a separate meeting.
Do you think President’s Rule will bring some peace or normalcy to Manipur?
If we are going to compare President’s Rule with the present government, then President’s Rule is much more preferable. But if there can be a responsible government, elected body with a different leader, who can acknowledge the significant contribution made by tribal people for freedom struggle of this country, who recognises them as an integral part of India and genuine citizens of this country –– then in that case, it may be better to have that kind of CM.
In your meeting with the home minister and the Prime Minister, you had asked for a chief secretary of your choice, the current civil aviation secretary. That request was not granted. You now have a new CS, who joined today?
There were two points for not allowing my request. One is he is too good an officer. The then home secretary told me that they cannot do without him. Another problem is that inter cadre transfer is very difficult and almost impossible now.
So, we did not get his service. After that, I asked for officers belonging to AGMUT cadre to be shortlisted. Out of five officers shortlisted, Mr Khilli Ram Meena is the chosen one. I am very happy with the home minster that he has given me my choice.
Continue reading with HT Premium Subscription
