Liability Bill simplified

India joined the elite club of nuclear powers on 11th May 1998. Although they immediately brought many economic sanctions but in the long run these nuclear tests had a huge significance. The Indo – US civilian nuclear deal was certainly one of its memorable outputs. In Oct 2008, being a non-NPT country India successfully crossed all barriers to finalize the Indo-US Civilian Nuclear Agreement. It was a big win for our country in the world arena. The agreement was to facilitate civilian nuclear partnership between United States and India along with many other mutual benefits on the term that India will separate its civilian and military nuclear facilities and put civilian facilities under the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspection. Soon other countries like Russia, France, Namibia, Canada and others joined the race and finalized similar deals with our country.

Presently the contribution of nuclear energy in the energy sector is around 4%. The civilian nuclear agreements with the above mentioned countries would certainly improve this dismal show. Also the Indian government has set a goal to reach the mark of 20,000 MW electricity produced using Nuclear power by 2020. These deals have definitely boosted the morals of our nuclear sector as almost 40 nuclear reactors will be installed in our country within a decade.

But to facilitate this nuclear commerce and attract U.S. private companies involved in nuclear commerce, it is necessary to pass the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill also known as Nuclear Liability Bill. Nuclear Liability Bill will thus define the financial and legal liabilities upon the involved groups i.e. manufacturers, operators and government in case a nuclear accident occurs. In this case, the suppliers and builders will be the U.S. private companies such as GE (General Electric) and Westinghouse and the operator will be the Indian government controlled Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL). This Bill will also help India to accede to the Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC) for nuclear damage.

After storming the whole monsoon session, the Bill was finally passed by the Loksabha. There have been a lot of controversies regarding the actual and final form of the Nuclear Liability Bill. The Clause 17 of the actual text, surrounding which the whole controversy was mounted read like this:

The Operator of a nuclear installation shall have a right to recourse where –

a) Such right is expressly provided for in a contract in writing.

b) The nuclear accident has resulted from the willful act or gross negligence on the part of the supplier of the material, equipment or services, or of his employees.

c) The nuclear accident has resulted from the act of commission or omission of a person done with the intent to cause nuclear damage.

As seen in the Clause 17 (b) of the above text, it actually defines the liability of the supplier side in case of a nuclear mishap. Here the clause 17 (b) has clearly mentioned the “Right to Recourse” by Indian operators against the suppliers in case any nuclear accident occurs due to defective equipment or design failure. While all multinational suppliers including Russia and France would prefer to remove such a clause, it is the US that is most insistent on this issue because its companies (GE, Westinghouse) are not backed by public finances and hence run the risk of bankruptcy if they have to pay damages for a large scale nuclear accident.

Owing to the US pressure, the government totally removed Clause 17 (b) from the Bill in its second version. It meant, US suppliers were no more responsible for any nuclear mishap even in case of their negligence. It was like giving a blank cheque to the suppliers. Insulating the suppliers from all liabilities could encourage them to take greater risks and compromise with the quality of equipments to make huge profits. It could pose a grave threat to the safety of our countrymen. How could our government forget the horrors of the world’s deadliest industrial mishap, the 1984 Bhopal Gas tragedy? It killed almost one lakh people and contaminated almost every drop of water and every dust of soil so that the people of Bhopal could carry this burden forever. Till now, the affected peoples are hammering the doors of justice for help. Hopefully our government won’t like to repeat any such incident in near future.

Respecting the true meaning of democracy the opposition reacted sharply in the recently concluded monsoon session and vehemently condemned the second version of the Bill which totally removed Clause 17 (b). Indian Government had no way but to bring back the Clause 17 (b) to get it passed in the Loksabha.

But this time round, playing some word games they included an “intent” clause in the Bill. It meant Indian operators can only sue the suppliers if only the accident was intentionally plotted by the suppliers. This was ridiculous, because it is always very hard to prove such a case and also it would have taken a long time to reach the culprits. Again the opposition played its role effectively and in the final version, the “intent” clause was removed.

Now as per the final version of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, Indian Operators can take action against the supplier if it is proved that the accident occurred due to some latent or patent defects in the equipment or design. Another issue which caught attention of the opposition was the amount prescribed as the relief package. Looking at the severity of a nuclear accident the Rs 500 crores as the nuclear accident indemnity appeared so meagre. Our government should have studied the history of nuclear accidents like Three Mile Island (TMI) before coming to this conclusion. In the final version the amount was raised from Rs. 500 crores to Rs. 1500 crores which is far more practical than the initial amount.

The proponents of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill might have challenged the opposition, that our country would lose the fruits of nuclear commerce very early if the Bill doesn’t see the daylight. But they need to understand that the safety of our countrymen should come first and at any cost. Finally it’s the democracy which won the battle of supremacy.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Deepak Pal works as a Software Analyst in an reputed IT Consultancy company. His areas of interests are India's Foreign Policy and domestic policies pertaining to Energy, Education, Agriculture and Industries.He may be contacted at indianpolicy2010@gmail.com

A look at Nepal

Recent Stalemate in Nepal:

Nepal is going through a rough time due to instability in her political domain. The Prime Minister (PM) Madhav Kumar Nepal handed over his resignation to the President Ram Baran Yadav at Shital Niwas on 1st July. Till then, Nepal was unable to find out a suitable PM who could have confidence to rule the country having necessary support. 4 rounds of elections already passed without showing a sign of solution. The next round of election is planned on 5th September.

Why Madhav resigned:

In a televised message to fellow countrymen, Madhav said that he didn’t want to see his country as a “hostage of indecision” due to exacerbated relations with the Maoists. Madhav, a former Civil Servant formally took oath for PM’s office on 25th May, 2009 after Pushpa Kumar Dahal alias Prachanda resigned. Prachanda wanted the President to accept his proposal to sack the Army chief Rookmangud Katawal since Katawal didn’t endorse his demand to integrate People’s Liberation Army (PLA) with Nepal’s National Army. This is firstly because these are the people whom National Army (NA) fought since the formation of PLA and secondly because large number of PLA could challenge his authority over NA. Ram Baran Yadav rejected Prachanda’s plea because his approval could make Prachanda de-facto dictator of Nepal and hence Madhav resigned. Till then, Prachanda didn’t co-operate Nepal’s government and helped Madhav to reach such an impasse.

Statistics of election in Nepal after Madhav resigned:

 

In the house of 601 candidates, either Prachanda or Ram Chandra Paudel from Nepal Congress (NC) had to bag 301 votes to secure the Prime Ministerial position. In all the 4 rounds of elections, nobody could get it. The main problem is posed by Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) and the United Democratic Madhesi Front (UDMF) comprising of four Madhesi parties who mostly remain neutral in the elections. The CPN (UMPL) and Madhesi parties have around 200 votes. CPN (UML) Chairman Jhalanath Khanal pressed for his nomination in the first round but withdrew later understanding the futility of his attempt. Prachanda already has 235 plus votes and needs around 70 votes to gain the simple majority. On the other hand Paudel has 120 plus votes for him. He needs considerable support from CPN (UML) and UDMF to form his government.

 

India’s Role:

Being the largest democracy of the world, India has onerous role to discharge. India shares bonhomie with Nepal since the Nehruvian age and it is her responsibility to release Nepal from this political imbroglio. In 2008, India worked tirelessly to abolish monarchy in Nepal and paved way for the Nepali Maoists to give up insurgency and take up government in Kathmandu. But Prachanda’s willingness to integrate PLA with the Army forced India to adopt a volte face policy to sidetrack Maoists from the government. Indian officials persuaded Upendra Yadav of Madhesi Janadhikar Forum to support Madhav and succeeded in installing Madhav in Kathmandu in 2009 in place of Prachanda. But the game plan seems not to be working with the emergence of Jhalanath Khanal (currently the chairman of CPN (UML)) who is sympathetic towards the Maoists.

Manmohan Singh’s “emissary with special mandate” Shyam Saran reached Kathmandu on 4th August in order to harmonize the rival interests erupting from various camps. Shyam Saran is a former foreign secretary of India and served as an ambassador in Nepal from November 2002 till July 2004. He is known to be adept at Nepalese matters and hence is entrusted to find a solution to this problem. He is close to most of the leaders of prominent parties but Nepal is yet to come out from this stalemate. But Saran is not accepted by Nepali people especially by Nepali Maoists. They believe his sole purpose is to destabilize the country with his diplomacy.

Solutions Ahead:

India is presently trying to ward off CPN led by Prachanda due to several reasons. Firstly he showed inclination towards China by advocating “new level of understanding” with “big neighbour”. He also cast aspersions on India over the Kalapani and Susta border issues; demanded revisions of 1950 Friendship Treaty between Nehru and Rana regime. Secondly, India has a feeling that CPN do have some leaders who still believe in insurgency and violence. Prachanda failed to control their aspirations and they could anytime raise their ugly heads. And finally Maoists ruling Nepal can bolster the attempts of their Indian counterparts.

But CPN(M) have 40% of the Nepalese votes as per the last election in 2008 to form the Constituent Assembly (CA). In this situation, the following proposals might be browsed through.

• NC candidate Poudel has to take the Madhesi parties into confidence. India has to work assiduously with the Madhesi parties to find a compromise. Madhesi parties belong to southern part of Nepal, mainly from Terai region. They have demands of political and economic autonomy; right to self-determination; implementation of old agreements with Madhesis; integration of Maoist combatants and mass recruitment of Madhesis in National army. Evidently, NC has definite reservations against their last two demands. India needs to make a compromise - might be through implementing “reservation” in Nepal for Madhesis and strike a deal between NC and Madhesi parties to end the deadlock.

• 4 rounds of futile elections probably showed the CPN (M) that 235 plus votes are not enough to form the government. India needs to create a bridge between NC and CPN(M) and work for viable solutions. The PLA needs to be integrated but after thorough trainings and relevant tests so that they would not conspire within the national army. This process also has to be in a phased manner. Nepal needs to contemplate how to attract PLA in civilian life. They need to generate alternative employments through infrastructure building, hydropower projects, tourism, horticulture, fruit preservation and export, handloom industries among others. The two-pronged strategy, first – gradual integration of PLA into National army and second – take away a fraction of PLA to lead normal civil life. India can engage her to consummate the goal of a stabilized and democratic Nepal.

• India needs to advocate an “open-minded” approach as far as CPN(M) in concerned although India’s concerns are not unfathomable. CPN(M) is the largest party in Nepal and no solution is possible by submerging their interests. India needs to be pro-active, hold wellnigh talks with them with a broader vision. CPN(M) led Madheshi supported Constituent Assembly (CA) would be another alternative.

Nepal also needs to appreciate that India is not a perturbation in Nepalese politics or India has to propagate this viewpoint among the common Nepalese. Nepal needs to come out of this quagmire and look forward. In this, India being the largest democracy in the world needs to facilitate the process. Both the nations are to ward off cynicism and work hand-in-hand. They also need to monitor and review every peace process to make the future bright.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Avijit Maity is working as a Software Analyst in a reputed IT Consultancy company. His areas of interests are India's Foreign Policy and domestic policies mainly related to Agriculture, Food, Energy, Education and Industries.He may be contacted at indianpolicy2010@gmail.com

Locus

"Opsis", and the Optics of Indian Democracy

Simply put, opsis is the Greek word for the element of ‘spectacle’ in drama. It is that which leads to the denouement, the final resolving of crisis, it is that which enthrals, that which binds the audience, and that which produces awe. But the problem of the word is that it negotiates and skirts the boundary of two meanings. Opsis, quite underwhelmingly, could also mean, “I see”. Stripped off the spectacle and the spectacular element, it reveals the bare reality, and the crudity of it.

Opsis, is elemental, as the Greek historians said, to the writing of history. Perhaps, for the Greek historians, ‘seeing’ was the preferred meaning for opsis, but the dilemma and uneasiness is evident. It is the same dilemma and the same uneasiness that haunts a chronicler of independent and ‘rising’ India. As the country celebrated it’s sixty fourth independence day, the chroniclers of her history find themselves increasingly befuddled by the multiplicity and choice of narratives.

There is indeed a narrative of ‘spectacles’, of Agni III launches, of multi-payload delivering rockets, of Corus takeovers, and of ‘Nano’-micro-macro economics, of FII inflows, and there is a narrative of Dantewadas, Vidarbhas, Nandigrams, etc. The choice is discreet and apparent. As we celebrate India’s sixty fourth independence day in a flurry of SMS’s, mails (not to count spams!), in a rhetoric of hubris, as we have done in all the independence days preceding this, the truth stands us in the face, eye to eye, and yet remains so elusive, so near, yet so far. The truth remains; there is not one, not even two, but multiple Indias, each with her own history, each with her own direction of history, and each existing in relative ignorance of the other. And sadly, this theme too, has been much flaunted, exploited, by people living inside, and by people living outside. Real money has been made by exploiting this theme of the multiplicity of our ‘motherland’. But, today, I am not in any way following, borrowing, hijacking, or plagiarising the theme of Rushdie and company. I write in pain.

However, the Prime Ministerial address, on the eve of Independence Day was not spectacular by any means. Dr. Singh has never been very ‘spectacular’, and of course I mean that in a positive sense, as a compliment. He is of course, where one feels comfortable in an otherwise ‘spectacular’ cabinet. He began citing a host of concerns, Ladakh, price rise (somehow, I am never comfortable with the word “inflation”, it lacks the reality of pain, and as a kid, I used to think that inflation meant ‘to inflate’, i.e. to grow, growth!!). But the cadence of his speech quickly changed texture and eagerly embraced the rhetoric of celebration. He said, “We were also affected by the global economic slowdown. I am happy to say that we have acquitted ourselves well in these difficult circumstances. Despite many problems, the rate of our economic growth has been better than most other countries in the world. This shows the strength of our economy.” I am however, not quite bemused by the word “acquitted”. How have we acquitted, and of what? I read the word “acquitted” betraying a sense of guilt in the speech...a desire to wash off. Barely a month back did the cabinet give the people their 64th Independence Day gift, a decontrolled price regime for petrol, with a further promise of decontrolled diesel, and general rise in price of petro products. I watched the T.V., watched the equity price of PSU OMC’s go up, private OMC’s go down. A few of my friends made money, we met in the evening, had dinner, celebrated. We ‘acquitted’ ourselves.

Perhaps Dr. Singh counts us (and him) ‘acquitted’ on account of the fact that the WPI annual food inflation (oops, price rise!) eased to 10.35% in the week ended Aug 7 from 11.4% a week ago. That is more than a percent, or in the celebratory and convenient vocabulary of economics, a full hundred basis points drop in weekly figures. The figures rose heftily in non food items as fuel prices rose 12.57% from a year ago and mineral prices 45.69% in the week. But the "aam admi" rarely need petrol, and minerals, and we have a reason to count us ‘acquitted’. Even, the monthly headline "price rise" eased to 9.97% in July on ‘statistical base effect’, a fact that is conveniently concealed and distressed. But the dark side of the moon says, that the year on year figure in terms of WPI increased by 10.51%, (July 09-July 10), and I excuse myself from the embarrassment of calculating that in terms of “basis points”.

And yes, the Monthly Economic Report (MER) (July data is given, as August data is yet to be published) of the Ministry of Finance carries a news of terrible disrepute...the IIP numbers has declined to 7.1%, as compared to 8.3% in June 2009. The centrality of the IIP numbers in the MER, as well as the peripherality/marginality of the core inflation numbers betrays the government’s intentions and allegiances. The slightest southward movement of IIP numbers are sure to draw industry pundits, management gurus, and corporate honchos in a concerted criticism of the government. While, the continual gravity defiance of inflation numbers can only produce a cacophony of disconcerted voices, discomforting bandhs, chakka jams.

The only ‘unorganised sector’ in this battle for hegemony is the ‘public’, the 'mob', the multiple ‘Indias’, hence they are carefully set against each other, stripped of the authority to speak for, rendered inexplicable, and finally discounted. The rising "inflation", and prise rise (they are quite different) were explained as international phenomena, and as something resulting from poor monsoons last year. Monsoon, and the absence of it, cannot be easily explained in terms of human responsibility; it is an act of God, and therefore provides the perfect opportunity to liquidate governmental accountability. Also in a globalised economy of money dependency, India cannot decouple from the globe as easily she had ‘recoupled’ with it in 1991, under the tutelage of Dr. Singh, the then finance minister.

The government therefore had to give in, and accept inflation as a ‘given’ condition. But where does the (much clichéd) buck stop? As a matter of fact, US and nearly all the developed economies are witnessing near zero inflation numbers today, and the Fed expects inflation to be subdued for some time now. Therefore whatever be the macro-economic implications of the fact, the ever increasing jobless claimants do not have to face the music of growing prices. Contrasted, we have a declining IIP, combined with shooting inflation; a perfect recipe for disaster. Also, any kid who goes to the local grocer for casual daily shopping knows the difference between WPI and real, retail prices better than our qualified economists. The MER of finance ministry claims that the food inflation numbers came down from last week’s as the government released cheap grains through PDS, an act that ostensibly looks like spontaneous benevolence.

Whose grain is it anyway?

And this happens at a time when the opposition is united against storing of grains in FCI godowns, with much of it even rotting in the rains. Recently news is emerging from the institutionalised propaganda centres of the government that the revenues from increased fuel prices (OMC bonds), as also the huge revenues from 3G auctions will be utilised to implement universal PDS in the country in place of Targeted PDS (TPDS). However, the news is not that recent after all; it made to headlines of newspapers a couple of months back, and today looks like yet another distant dream--a dream that the poor of our land no longer find credible. The first UPA government gave us a dream, of an equitable land; it saw the rudimentary and elementary realisation of that dream in NREGA, (now MGNREGA, with the father of the nation’s name as a prefix!), SJGSY, JNNURM, RTI act. The nation was ready to imagine and continue imagining (the continued desire to imagine reflected in the resounding electoral victory in the General Elections). The UPA II is a rude waking up, a shock.

The nation, we say is a collective imagination, it is an ‘imagined community’. Ernest Renan said that the nation thrives on a daily imagined plebiscite, a continuation of faith in her existence. Today’s Indias are a result of fractured imaginations, one for the poor, one for the rich, one for Maoists, one for the mainstream political parties, and it is no use to go to sleep.

----------------------------------------------------------

Rajarshi Mitra, an Assistant Professor in English Literature, has profound interest in Indian politics. He may be contacted at indianpolicy2010@gmail.com

Why Africa ??

The 'Scramble for Africa' during the period of New Imperialism [ late nineteenth century ], led to the economic subjugation, political domination and territorial division of the continent. All this was done to justify the ‘White man’s burden’ – a concept, core to racial superiority. Most African colonies were faithful to the European powers during the two world wars but became defiant after their masters retracted from the promise of freedom. After 1945, they started to throw off the yoke of foreign powers and gradually emerged victorious.

Thus, it is no surprise that in 2010, 17 African nations celebrate 50 years of their independence. The ‘dark continent’ is now on the path to modernity and globalization. From the Aswan dam to Kalahari Desert, Africa can be viewed as a motley of cultures that reverberate in its ethos. From the geo-strategic and geo-economic perspective, there has been a significant rise in the importance of Africa owing to its strategic location, oil deposits, mineral wealth, booming market and rich bio-diversity.

Viewed through the prism of History, trade links between India and Africa were restricted mostly to the countries in the ‘Horn of Africa’. In the 6th Century A.D., Indian ships flocked to the Ethiopian ports to trade in silk and spices for gold and ivory. However, in modern days and with the expansion of diplomatic and commercial representations, India has now developed ties with most of the African nations.

Nehru and Krumah : discussing Neo-imperialism?

The efforts of Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru have weaved strong cohesiveness in Indo-Africa Relations. India played a substantial part in Africa’s de-colonization and its fight against apartheid. When the Non Aligned Movement [NAM] was founded in Belgrade in 1961, a leading role was played by both India and Africa. In recent years, most of the focus has been on trade, investment and economic relations. Indo-African trade has reached $35 billion and the target is to double it by 2014.

The leading members of India Inc. have made substantial investments in Africa. The Tata group, construction major Shapoorji-Pallonji & Co., BM Khaitan owned McLeod-Russel India, ICICI bank etc are forerunners in this regard. Co-operation in health care, agriculture, mining, hydrocarbon sectors are also on the rise. In the Defence sector, India assists countries like Nigeria, Zambia and Botswana through training and exposure to best practices.

The West African nation of Nigeria is the largest African crude oil supplier to India — India imports 400,000 barrels per day from Nigeria valued at 10 billion USD annually. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Videsh Limited [ OVL ] has invested in Sudan, Ivory Coast, Libya, Egypt etc. India has recently completed a $200 million project to lay a pipeline from Khartoum to Port Sudan on the Red sea.

In recognition of India’s growing role as an industrial and economic power, last year Egypt offered India to set up an ‘India Zone’ along the Suez Canal development area. Interestingly, 35 per cent world’s trade passes through the Suez Canal and this offer could give tremendous opportunity to India to extend its reach to emerging markets in North Africa and Europe.

In the east, Indian firms have invested around $3 billion in Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique and Madagascar to produce wide variety of food crops and crops that could be used a bio fuels. Indian government is actively encouraging investments in land acquisition programmes by providing cheap lines of credit to these countries.

In 2009, India signed a civilian nuclear co-operation deal to trade in Uranium and build nuclear power plants with the South African country of Namibia. Also, by 2008 India had emerged as the largest contributor to UN mandated operations in Africa, with a cumulative effort totaling more than 30,000 personnel involved in peacekeeping, humanitarian and electoral missions.

In addition, the Indian sponsored Pan-African e-Network [ in partnership with the African Union ] links 53 countries through tele-medicine, education, governance and plays a crucial role in developing skills and resources that are critical for Africa’s growth.

Owing to the 'China Factor', India has been religiously promoting trade with Africa in recent years. It launched the 'Focus: Africa' program under the EXIM Policy 2002-07, thus providing financial assistance to various inter-regional trade promotion schemes. Interestingly, on agrarian front, Andhra Pradesh is exporting farmers to East Africa, so that they can help their counterparts with skill and expertise.

Thus, we can say that India has a reasonably successful policy towards Africa - one that strikes a balance between our values and interests. But more needs to be done.

India is all set to contest the post of non-permanent member in the United Nations’ Security Council in January 2011. Thus, it becomes imperative to garner the support of nations across the world including the African Union [AU], which is an association of 53 African countries. Possibly, this is the reason, why in the first half of 2010, VP Hamid Ansari visited Zambia, Malawi, Botswana, Mauritius and Mozambique.

This increased co-operation and growth in economic-cultural ties is also very important in the run up to the 'India-Africa Forum summit' in 2011. India and Africa, both being members of the Commonwealth, the tri-continental India-Brazil-South Africa [ IBSA ] and NAM, can also try to improve their relations through these associations.

In an effort to boost trade ties, India can plan to provide duty-free access to products from African countries. It can also work on double taxation avoidance mechanism. Also, in the wake of piracy attacks in the Gulf of Aden, Indian Navy can play a larger role.

Another area which can be strengthened is Indian Technical and Economic Co-operation Programme [ ITEC ] which aims to develop human resource through various trainings and workshops in target countries. The Indo-African collaboration in this regard can be taken to greater heights.

India and Africa together make up a large section of the ‘south block’. They have strong historical links, share similar views, want to bring reforms to the existing world financial institutions and face similar internal/external challenges. Africa can serve as a huge market for the growth of India’s economy and its global presence. India thus, should deepen its engagement in Africa by considering it as an emerging priority.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Indira Mukherjee is a Computer Engineer and works in a reputed IT consulting company in Kolkata. She takes keen interest in India's history, foreign policy and domestic issues. She is passionate about quizzing as well. She may be contacted at indianpolicy2010@gmail.com

Manipur's blockade

On 26th November 1949, 'we, the people of India' emphatically resolved to constitute our nation into a 'sovereign, democratic republic'. 60 years later, despite the plethora of problems faced, we proudly declare that we are the largest democracy in the world. But this evolution has neither been smooth nor steady. Apart from the multitude of problems arising due to partition and apathetic socio-economic conditions in 1947, a major task was to consolidate the internal and external borders of the nascent country. This massive task of integrating the 500+ princely states with India was carried out by the 'Iron man' – Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel though the 'Instrument of Accession'.

Over the last six decades, the political map of India has undergone numerous changes. The seeds of secession which India adopted at its birth have grown into major pockets of unrest. Today, the country is in the grip of intensified demands of statehood and autonomy which cuts across its length and breadth. From Kashmir in the north to Telenganna in the peninsula, from Vidarbha in Maharashtra to Gorkhaland in West Bengal, the situation is tense and it requires a holistic and everlasting solution.

Further east, crossing the 'chicken’s neck', one enters into a region which is a cauldron of separatist movements. United Liberation Front of Asom [ULFA], National Democratic Front of Bodoland [NDFB], National Socialist Council of Nagalim - Isak Muivah [NSCN-IM] etc all have made their presence felt from time to time and clearly specified their claims of “enhanced sovereignty” with means ranging from violence to dialogue and from constitutional to extra-constitutional.

The NSCN-IM, demanding a 'Greater Nagalim' created ripples last month by its never-ending blockade of Manipur, which is already one of the most troubled parts of the north-east on account of several insurgencies. It has witnessed almost 88 days of blockades in two phases, surviving solely on army-escorted supplies. The state faced acute shortage of essential commodities like medicines and food grains, with prices shooting up to Rs 70/- per kg rice and LPG cylinders at Rs 1500/-.

NSCN-IM has claims over territories in Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Assam. The reason why Manipur stands out as an exception is because Nagaland controls the highway that is Manipur’s main link with the rest of India – NH39. The other Highway - NH53 is practically impassable due to landslips and bad road conditions. Led by NSCN-IM, the Nagas have exploited this geographical advantage to press their claim over four districts in Metei-majority Manipur through the blockade.

The present siege began in mid April when the Manipur Government, led by Okram Ibobi Singh, decided to hold Autonomous District Council elections, including in the districts claimed by the Nagas. The Nagas opposed by saying that this took away vital rights of the hill people. Moreover, the situation worsened when the Ibobi Government barred NSCN-IM leader T Muivah from visiting his birthplace in Manipur saying it would incite communal tension. On 24th August, the United Naga Council extended the economic blockade by another 25 days.

Roots to this Naga movement go back to mid 1950s, when under the influence of A.Z Phizo, the Naga National Council inclined towards seeking secession from India. The Naga secessionist groups regard him as the 'Father of the Nagas'. The NSCN-IM was raised on April 30, 1988 by Isak Chisi Swu and Thuingaleng Muivah with an aim to establish a ‘Greater Nagalim’ based on Mao Zedong’s ideology. Their principles include Socialism for economic development and a spiritual outlook – ‘Nagaland for Christ’.

After years of delay and ignorance, the centre seems to be buckled up now to pay due attention to this issue. The peace process with the NSCN-IM was started in 1997 by putting in place a ceasefire arrangement. Since then, over 50 rounds of talks were held between Centre and Naga groups, but could not achieve any breakthrough. In February 2010, IAS officer R.S Pandey was appointed as the interlocutor to facilitate talks with NSCN-IM. There have already been more than 3 rounds of discussion this year and the Union Government has extended the cease-fire agreement for another year till April 28, 2011.

The question is – why has the pace of 'talks' accelerated suddenly?

During the ceasefire period, NSCN-IM has strengthened itself and become the de-facto government in Naga inhabited areas of Manipur – it collects taxes, dispenses justice and ensures security. It has also demanded a separate flag, constitution and more control on finances and natural resources. This is a grave threat to national interests and internal security. Moreover, in early 2010, NSCN-IM joined hands with Hurriyat Conference of Jammu and Kashmir [ J&K ] and Dal Khalsa of Punjab to put pressure on the Centre for an ‘early solution' to the impasse in Nagaland, Jammu and Kashmir and Punjab’.

Central intelligence agencies have indicated that the NSCN-IM is re-arming by procuring sophisticated arms and ammunition - mostly from China. Muivah had visited China in the 1960s and his outfit has had a Leftist leaning although it is based on a platform of Christianity. A few years ago, there was a meeting between the CPI [ Maoist ] and NSCN-IM which took place near Dimapur [ on the Assam-Nagaland border ]. However, Muivah has also said that killing of civilians was against Naga culture.

New Delhi has categorically ruled out any division of Manipur or other neighbouring states to appease the Nagas, causing much resentment to them. Interlocutor R.S Pandey has said that the centre is 'honestly sincere' to find a solution to the Naga problem but has also made it clear that the Government believes in the concept of 'shared sovereignty' as opposed to NSCN-IM’s notion of 'full sovereignty'. In addition, the Home ministry is of the opinion that it will come to a decision only after talks with all Naga underground groups.

Its high time that priority is given to measures which will ensure that the present situation does not drift any longer without a resolution as the lives of ordinary people are at stake. Immediate efforts should be made to lift the economic blockade of Manipur and restore normalcy in the state. Thereafter, the centre can embark on a coherent and responsible policy, based on objective assessment of the situation to ensure an everlasting solution to this problem.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Indira Mukherjee is a Computer Engineer and works in a reputed IT consulting company in Kolkata. She takes keen interest in India's history, foreign policy and domestic issues. She is passionate about quizzing as well. She may be contacted at indianpolicy2010@gmail.com