THE LAW OF GUERILLA ENTROPY
Explaining why members of northeastern insurgencies now seek answers through talks
IAnyone who experiences today’s Nagaland, tranquil and picturesque, would find it hard to believe this was home to India’s longest and bloodiest insurgency – yes, worse than Kashmir. Based on a series of interviews with prominent members of various Northeastern insurgencies, In Pursuit of Conflict tries to explain why they took up arms in the first place and why so many today seek answers through talks. Avalok Langer gives a sense of the culture of violence and corruption that embedded itself in this part of India and, along the way, offers a frank and amusing account of what it’s like to be a journalist in difficult conditions.
The National Socialist Council of Nagaland is often called the “mother of insurgencies” because of its role in training and supporting similar groups in the other Northeastern states. Thenoselie Keyho, ex-commander of the NSCN, describes how the first Naga contingents walked to China in 1967 to secure Beijing’s support. “The Pakistanis had given us basic weapons training and a few arms, but the Chinese not only trained our boys to fight, but taught us military strategy and imparted political and psychological training,” he says. Beijing promised the Nagas airdropped supplies and diplomatic support if they “liberated” a bit of territory. It never happened. Indian intelligence won over one Naga group who betrayed the rest.
The Nagas continued fighting, but their own internal fissures kept them from being genuinely effective. In a pattern seen with other insurgencies, the longer they failed to reach their political goals the more they descended into criminality. There are those who have yet to accept this law of guerrilla entropy.
Ibotombi Khuman of the People’s Revolutionary Party of Kangliepak, a byproduct of Manipur’s history of alternating independence and subjugation, speaks of continuing the fight. He talks of coal and oil reserves that would provide for an independent Manipur.
Ranjan Daimary, head of the National Democratic Front of Bodoland, “the most ruthless and violent group in the Northeast” demands a Bodo homeland “within the Indian Constitution” yet his organization continues to kill and pillage. Daimary, presently on trial, targeted Bangladeshi Muslims, but his fight was not driven by religion or independence but the more intractable issue of immigration and demographic change.
Langer complains how an apathetic political leadership has allowed the migration issue to fester. Though from a distinguished army family, he is critical of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. While there were legitimate reasons for imposing it, the longer Indian security forces function under its sweeping powers the more they become prone to abuse and arbitrariness – a mirror of what happens to insurgencies over time.
Northeast specialists will not find all that much new and there are gaps. The United Liberation Front of Assam and the Mizos get only a passing mention. The fighters are one-by-one accepting talks and AFSPA has been withdrawn from Meghalaya. A different Northeast is emerging.
“In five years, a new generation had obviously come of age. A post-conflict generation. The ceasefire had given rise to youths who hadn’t grown up in active conflict, hadn’t lived through the killings…For them, those were just stories...”