Dr. Aküm Longchari
I have mixed feelings on the term State Building, so allow me to say a word on it:
• The term “State building” embodies the historical burden of the modern human experience.
• Charles Tilly tells us that War made States and States in turn made War. Isn’t the formation of Nagaland state an example of this link? We need to explore the link between war-making and state-building.
• “State building” sounds colonial. During decolonization period, state-building excluded and denied indigenous peoples – including the Nagas – their right to self-definition and right to decide their future.
• “State building” feels outdated. The 20th century was a century of state-building and state-determination, but the 21st century has so far clearly been a century of peoples-determination.• Since our topic is “State-Building” we need to ask did People create State or State create People? This leads us to the discourse on “Nation States.” And let us remember, Nation and State are two different concepts.
Despite these historical dilemmas, in the spirit of dialogue and for purposes of this panel discussion and with the likelihood that State-building here implies building of the Naga people, I wish to share some reflections.
Practical Suggestions for Young Legislators to reflect on:
I. Be honest and truthful and serve with humility, dignity and respect.
II. Conduct Free, Fair and Clean election campaigns that are issue based; and END the culture of taking commissions. This is at the heart of transparent governance and accountable leadership.
III. The growing culture of elitism and the destructive gap between the haves and haves-not must be confronted and resolved. This is both a political and a moral responsibility.
IV. Governance in Nagaland often implies to manage and contain the situation. This is not governance. What we need is Good Governance, Self-Governance and Inclusive Governance that starts from the bottom up and is politically representative and inclusive of the most marginalized sections of society.
V. Focus on quality value-based education – both formal and informal – and take the lead in transforming the education model from the “banking concept to a liberating concept.”
VI. The dialogue of the deaf needs to be replaced by a dialogue of active listening and respect.
VII. Young legislators change the norm! Rather than post-policy participation, include people in the pre-policy phase of policy making so that the common good is represented and people take ownership of it. Ownership also implies that the structures for policy implementation need to be contextual, pragmatic, value based and culturally relevant.
VIII. Exercise shared responsibility by repealing the Disturbed Areas Act – which in effect means the AFSPA – and other anti-democratic legislation. Focus on Democratization of Naga society, which means democracy goes hand in hand with liberty and freedom, and yes, peaceful dissent.
IX. A paradigm shift is required in leadership styles. Today we need leaders that do not confine themselves to the experiences and feelings of the people. This may lead to temporary popularity but it comes at the price of condemnation by posterity, whose claims you are neglecting. Neither do we need leaders who get too far ahead of society and run the risk of being irrelevant. Today, we need leaders with vision who identify with the people and are able to bridge the gap between vision and the existential reality.
X. Naga society needs legislators that are involved not because they have commitments, but have commitments because they are involved. In other words the interest in serving the people must be shaped out of their commitment. Not the other way around. So we need legislators that are willing to think and act out of the system, and are persuaded to change, in order to change the status quo.
XI. Cultivate a culture of a Just Peace, explore and create alternative models of governance in which the people are no longer objects of history, but makers of their own destiny. It begins by confronting the culture of impunity and dismantling the structures of violence.
Aristotle reminds us that the only stable state is the one in which all human beings are equal before the law. This point to the need for a political, social, economic, cultural future based on philosophical underpinnings and values. And so we require a leader that can evolve a value-based praxis that leads to a shared imagination that transcends beyond borders, boundaries and the isms of exclusion, prejudice, fear and hate.
Finally, at the crux of the matter lies the fact that our legislators may be faced with the tension between political will and political power. For all our sake I hope they will choose political will over political power as we explore together the path to a shared future.
