A number of tributes to uncle Niketu Iralu has been published, capturing the many facets of the man, his contributions to our society and the legacy he left behind.
These past few days have seen a number of tributes to uncle Niketu Iralu in the local dailies, capturing the many facets of the man, his contributions to our society and the legacy he left behind. Uncle Niketu was clearly a man of many qualities. As I reflected on the conversations I had with him over the past few years, I felt I should share my own personal understanding of the man who impacted many lives. I am aware that there are people who interacted with him far more than I did and knew him much better than I do, but I would be failing on my part not to share a facet about him that I found most rewarding.
In uncle Niketu’s worldview, the Nagas formed the centre-piece and everything revolved around it. No wonder he spent his entire life working on finding solutions to the many crises that engulfed the Naga society. In one of my conversations with him on an initiative that focuses on bringing about transformation in our society, uncle Niketu had this to say: “Those who have been responding to our people's crisis all the time are wrestling with realities that are raising deeply felt questions…Well, nothing is more important than that for our people in crisis.”
Like his contemporaries, uncle Niketu would have struggled to make sense of the complex realities of the world around him growing up in the Naga Hills. Navigating a world through the prism of knowledge systems influenced by and mediated through the Western world, he would have questioned the dominant frames through which to situate the Nagas. At some point in his life, he began to view the world by placing the Nagas at the centre and this formed the innermost circle of uncle Niketu’s concentric circles of concerns. This also allowed him to view the Nagas and their crisis from within a wider framework.
Uncle Niketu often used the phrase, “we (Nagas) and our neighbours.” His understanding of “our neighbours” stretches from Kashmir-Ladakh across the Himalayas through Northeast India and on to Southeast Asia. In any conversation, if someone drops the names of Bhutan, Myanmar, Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka or names of communities such as the Kachins, the Meiteis, the Assamese, the Chins, the Mizos, the Khasis, the Bodos, and so on, he would lean in and give full attention to every word. His keen interest and acute sense of interpreting developments in the neighborhood suggest the importance he attached to the impact of geography on politics and how geopolitical dynamics shape our existence.
In his framework, “our neighbours” formed the second circle. In his quest to better understand “our people in crisis”, he realised that understanding “our neighbours” was equally important. At the core of his approach was the understanding that there cannot be peace or growth, if our neighbours were in crisis. It was perhaps this recognition that shaped his outlook towards that outside world. From this perspective, uncle Niketu understood one of the key principles of geopolitics: friends may change, but neighbors are permanent. He saw a sense of purpose in understanding our neighbours and tried to instill the importance of it in others. In another conversation around what was unfolding in “our neighborhood”, this was what he said: “This (is the) most important reality, our people just have to understand soonest, if we are to survive to go into the future.”
Uncle Niketu’s understanding of our neighborhood stemmed from the imperative to understand our neighborhood from the standpoint of the Nagas and also to understand how our neighbours view the Naga situation. He was of the belief that without understanding our neighbours it was a futile exercise to think about our future because what happens in our neighborhood impinge upon us. His approach was clearly guided by the desire to understand and engage with our neighbours for the simple logic that we do not live in isolation and that understanding how our neighbours view our position was equally critical in understanding our own position. For him, making our neighbours understand our position was vital in our effort to build a better future.
As a matter of fact, considering his desire to see that our people develop interest and follow developments in our neighborhood, at one point, we discussed at length the need for a Centre for the study of Myanmar and Northeast India that could be housed in an educational institution in Nagaland. When I first shared the idea with him along with a concept note, this was how he replied: “As I read on, I felt I was experiencing an observation made by an 18th/19th century German writer: ‘It is certain my conviction grows infinitely the moment another soul believes in it.’ Friedrich von Hardenberg.” Uncle Niketu’s idea for such a Centre was, in his words: “to focus on the change and growth of the human element.” Unfortunately, that desire could not be materialised.
Uncle Niketu was a realist and looked at the world as interlinked with each societal issue forming a part of the whole. In one of our conversations on the question of diversity among the many societies surrounding us, he said: “We have to evolve a wider common stability and cooperation among ourselves in order to grow together/go forward together…. Ignoring and failing to respond correctly to the challenges of diversity means being destroyed by the challenges of diversity.” He tried his best to understand the immediate and long-term challenges that we, the Nagas and our neighbours confront- to learn how to accept and respond to the challenges, collectively and as individuals.
The realism uncle Niketu espoused was in stark contrast with that of classical Machiavellian realism as he viewed real politik through the lens of restorative framework grounded on the question: “How am I impacting others?” As he explained his approach in these words: “I intend to focus on the healing/restoration of our inter-tribe relationships so that we may better respond to the challenges of the changes impacting us so relentlessly”, from both within and outside. In my understanding, uncle Niketu offered us a fresh paradigm to view and understand the world around us. The above discussion is certainly not a comprehensive exposition nor the last word on uncle Niketu’s worldview. It is intended to initiate discussion on issues that were so dear to uncle Niketu’s heart.
His genuine interest to understand and engage with our neighbours was evident from the rich personal friendships he cultivated with many people cutting-across age, profession, ethnicity, or religion. In fact, my relationship with uncle Niketu began on a topic relating to our neighbours and later evolved into many other issues of common interests, but our conversation on “our neighbours” continued till his last days. I dearly miss the rich conversations with him.
I could not let this go without mentioning a couple of things about uncle Niketu that stayed with me. In our conversations on political or social issues, he would often end with a line in Tenyidie: “Sikecüpuochiibatele” (a situation of that nature is playing out). Apart from the joy of listening to the way he would say the line, it showed his ability to always have a perspective on issues to share with others. Second, his unfailing words of encouragement. Today, I like to return the gratitude with his own words for his contributions to our society. Thank you, Uncle “for taking us forward” with your “bold, constructive and refreshing ideas”.
Khriezo Yhome
(The writer is a scholar with a research focus on Southeast Asian studies. He can be reached at khriezo@gmail.com)