Jarpum Gamlin
(Published in The Sentinel ARUNACHL on August 20, 2010)
Lok Sabha member Takam Sanjoy’s provocative words on the eve of Independence Day terming the anti-dam activists as ‘anti-national’ have raised many eye-brows about the antics of congress leaders in the state. Frequency of indulgence in name calling such as ‘anti-national’ to every second person or organisation for voicing their concerns in Arunachal Pradesh only proves that these congress leaders have either picked up a new word ; thus, uttering it like toddler or else, they have misconstrued the meaning of ‘anti-national’. Such strong word used slackly and repeatedly by matured and seasoned political leaders against youngsters who are on verge of a tipping point of democratic social movement is as good as deliberately stamping onto mines to ignite blasts.
To all those discerning Arunachalees- observers and academicians- who are closely monitoring the social movement, so called ‘anti-dam activists’ are not ‘anti-dam’ per se but it appears that for want of right word, ‘anti-dam’ currency is being used to refer to this heterogeneous group which mostly comprises of activists-social, cultural and environmental- who are as concerned as political leaders of ruling and treasury bench, about development of state.
So far situation does not warrant anybody to be called ‘anti-national’, thus seasoned politicians must stop getting into ‘vocal fights’ and ‘slogan shouting’ businesses. If at all government or the elected members wish to call them ‘anti-national’, let these activists be booked under relevant Acts for treachery against the nation state. For that matter, even Takam Sanjoy himself was booked under now outdated draconian act, TADA at one point in time. There is precedence so why not book these activists if leaders have concluded that they are anti-national elements. Otherwise, let’s not brandish them as ‘anti-national’ for voicing their opinion within the democratic framework created by subsequent congress led government at New Delhi, right from Nehru to Indira and from Rajiv to Manmohan Singh.
On the eve of Independence Day, Takam Sanjoy was joined by Minister for Power, Jarbom Gamlin in batting for hydro-power development in the state. Gamlin’s statement on the sidelines of NE Power Ministers Meet at Shillong in which he pegged the potential or projected revenue generating capacity of hydropower in the state at Rs 70 billion was baffling. Discerning Arunachalees are keen on knowing the very basis on which Gamlin and his team of financial wizards arrived at this mind-boggling figure besides contextualizing that magical even number. Not to forget, people are still keen on knowing the full fate of ‘upfront money’ paid by the power-developers.
Gamlin and Takam, both of whom have led the social movement, as President of All Arunachal Pradesh Students Union (AAPSU), against refugees in early ’80s and ’90s respectively. They know it too well that developmental politics is a new subject for Arunachalees. Thus, understanding the depths and dimensions of developmental politics needs awareness and education. Both of them having come from ranks must shoulder the responsibilities.
Having said that, coming back to issue of dam, leaders across spectrums must realize that there are problems galore when it comes to dam and its developers. Problems- either real or imaginative- need to be sorted out through dialogue process without procrastinating it any further. Realisation must dawn upon the bosses at helm of affairs that unaddressed and prolonged problems would turn into grievances and consequently can cause conflicts. And in all probability, as experienced across North Eastern states, unresolved conflicts have always turned violent and militant. And in violent and militant environment all actions are justified by all means in the name of struggle for social justice. As said earlier, we are on a tipping point which could tilt either ways at this point in time. So far Arunachal has been a pristine state and it must remain so but voices from Dibang and Siang basins which are faintly echoing in the power corridor might take shape of struggle for social justice in near future, if not addressed now. Faintly heard voice is gaining in decibel with each passing day. Dipstick measures of moods of youngsters in these two basins indicate creepy feelings of being alienated from development process. Such feeling, if takes root, would be unhealthy; and such feeling of alienation is not a desirable situation in Arunachal, which is yet to experience full-scale industrialization in independent India which celebrated its 64th anniversary of breaking shackles from yoke of British Empire.
Make no mistake, a word of caution must be sounded to the activists for the way they are going about creating social movement. Activists who are mostly in their early 30’s must flip through the pages of Arunachal’s history on collaborative approach. Whenever Arunachalees have collaborated with neighbouring state in launching agitations and movements, Arunachalees have been used and dumped in the name of collaboration. ‘Anti-foreigners movement’ in early 1980s must be a learning lesson for all and sundry. Mainstream media and ‘think-tank’ at New Delhi have always gauged movements in Arunachal as an offshoot of what has been happening in the neighbouring state like Assam. Case in point is: ‘Anti-foreigner movement’ which was launched in both Assam and Arunachal Pradesh in the early part of 80’s. Assam ended up benefiting with ‘Assam Accord’ on August 15, 1985, but we have achieved nothing till date. On top of nothingness, we ended up losing a case in Supreme Court against those very same refugees. If indigenous anti-dam activists in Arunachal are serious then they must argue their case professionally with facts and figures; not through emotive appeal and slogan shouting campaigns. It is about time that youth of the state must realize that it is our land, it’s our problem; we need not import leaders and activists who need Inner line Permit (ILP) to enter our ancestral land. If at all needed, bring dam experts and scientists to provide scientific inputs. Secondly, anti-dam activists must be cautious of certain sections of political leaders who are acting as shadow Hydro-power Ministers. These shadow ministers can’t be Jackyl and Hyde for far too long. It is an open secret that these leaders have been lobbying against dam in the state but on other hand, same leaders have gone out of their way to hobnob with power developers in the metros for financial benefits. If anti-dam activists are sincere about raising their concerns as socio-cultural and environmental issues then there is a need to cleanse every ounce of political influences.
All said and done, time has come for political leaders to appreciate that voice of disagreement on policy and programme in a democratic set up is not at all wrong or unfair. Therefore, such voice can’t be myopically viewed as simple ‘law and order’ problem. Even, young activists must shed their glasses of suspicion and realize that these very leaders, who are promoting industrialization in the state, too have young off-springs who are in 20s and 30s besides young children. Therefore, it would be fair to assume that these leaders are equally concerned about the future of our ancestral habitats. With benefits of doubt to each of them, both parties need to sit across and initiate the dialogue process, without getting into uncivilized name calling business.
No comments:
Post a Comment