Of fault-lines in Assam-Mizoram conflict

Raju Korti

The travel advisory issued by Assam government asking people not to travel to Mizoram is a serious reminder of how the states on the North-Eastern fringes of the country lapse into serious internal conflicts at the drop of a hat. Since the last few days, the border between Assam and Mizoram has seen a a number of violent skirmishes following provocation from the latter's civil society, mostly students and youth organizations. Matters precipitated with reports of fierce gun battle on the border leaving some policemen and civilians dead. This is a dangerous augury for a country that has been grappling with one internal conflict after the other, especially in the post 80s era.

The gravity of the situation can be gauged by the fact that this is the first of its kind advisory any state government has issued. I do not think this has happened even in the wake of worst violence resulting from the Maharashtra-Karnataka boundary dispute. While other cases of internal conflicts relating to Khalistan, Gorkhaland, separate Vidarbha and Tamil Eelam have quietened down, the North-East cauldron remains on the boil with periodic trouble on its porous borders. They are perennially vulnerable to armed support from hostile neighbours. The North-Eastern states have shown a marked inclination towards solving their disputes to armed struggle and insurgency. Little surprise panic and apprehension prevails on the border at all times and peace processes are tenuous.

Armed rebellions are not a new phenomenon in the mercurial North-East. Assam, Nagaland, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Tripura and Sikkim have never had a track record of lasting peace on their borders. If it is not about an armed conflict with the Indian government, it is about internecine feuds. There was some respite in the early 90s when the situation appeared to ease but the situation is usually compounded by the presence of several armed factions. These factions nurse their own ideas of separatism -- from regional autonomy to complete independence.       

Most of these states are at loggerheads with the Centre. There is constant tension between native tribals and migrants from other part of India. Remember how in the 80s; Prafulla Kumar Mahanta led the students to become the chief minister with the 'sons of the soil' electoral plank. Besides, these states are not well connected with the country's mainland. They stand alienated despite being on the same map. I suspect, the situation was further aggravated when the Centre applied the Armed Forces Special Power Act (AFSPA) that was intended to quell the armed rebellion with similar tactics. The constant overt and covert attempts by China and Myanmar to stir up trouble queer the pitch.      

Assam has jealously tried to retain its political and cultural identity. Rampant infiltration from Bangladesh keeps altering the state's demographics. The anger of the Assamese is rationalized on the premise that illegal migrants could become the majority if their intrusions are not checked and that would mean loss of political power. There is nothing to show that this alone is the cause of unrest in these states. The North-East is not an industry-rich region. It is resource--deficit and does not have economies of scale to match. The security is uneven with its borders open to intrusions by militants and arms smuggling. 

One would expect that the Governors of such states as executive heads are competent to deal with such crises. The Sarkaria Commission set up in 1983 -- just around the time when North-East was a growing hotspot -- to look into entire gamut of Centre-State relations, made a number of recommendations on the appointments of the Governor. Since most of these went completely against the spirit of all political parties, the key recommendations were kept in cold storage. None of the governments at the Centre had the political will to implement the recommendations in toto. For the Centre; the Sarkaria report was like a razor asking it to cut its own throat.

Although "Seven Sisters", as the North-Eastern states are referred to, have a tumultuous history of border disputes, the backlash has been much severe this time.  In my considered opinion, it is not just a question of bringing these states into the country's  political mainstream. I wonder why the Centre gave the North-Eastern states a short shrift when it went about the reorganization of states and territories along linguistic lines. If anything it showed that these states were never on the check-list of the Centre if the idea was to streamline them. It allowed the disputes to get uglier and open to manipulation by external forces. The Centre just dithered and drifted making no worthwhile attempts to convince the states to accept a workable solution on accepting boundaries. Piecemeal solutions have not worked. It will not even now. '

Assam and Mizoram have been talking through their chief secretaries in a Centre-chaperoned dialogue process to douse inter-state border tensions before their respective police forces fatally clashed. The funniest part is the parties to the dispute swear by peaceful resolution and the unfortunate part is the quest for peace is through war and strife. 

Abdullahs in a 'begaani shaadi" called Afghanistan

Raju Korti
As Afghanistan hurtles from one crisis to another, I recall a piece that I wrote in The Indian Express in 1994 when the Taliban was making decisive inroads to gain control in the war-ravaged country. I had categorically stated that this was a war nobody would win. The Soviet Union coming to grips with its fragmentation had chosen to leave the theatre after installing a puppet government in 1989. The US took a headlong plunge post 2001 but it took them more than two decades to realize that they were fighting a futile war.

Taliban: Waiting for the decisive strike (File grab)

Battlefield since 1978, the emergence of Taliban and their dramatic advances had raised high hopes among war-weary Afghans that their miseries would come to an end. These hopes were dashed sooner than both the Soviets and Americans had thought. After overrunning Kabul, the Taliban remained engaged in a proxy war with the opposition forces led by Ahmed Shah Massoud. History has now repeated with Taliban gaining almost 80% control amidst heavy bloodshed. All because neighbouring countries and regional powers are viciously united in their continued support to the warring factions. 

I had also predicted that the internal conflict between anti-communist Islamic guerrillas and the Afghan communist government would blow up into a long Cold War between NATO and Warsaw Pact countries. The US withdrawal has been twenty years in the making. In its zeal to leave its global footprint, the US learnt next to nothing from the Vietnam war and its military miscarriages in Grenada, Nicaragua, Argentina, Fiji and elsewhere. The strife in Afghanistan has been costly, exhausting and increasingly unpopular, spilling over from one administration to another since George Bush. It persisted despite Obama and Trump making campaign promises under their respective presidencies.

President Biden's announcement about US exit is hasty, risky and ill-timed. For one, it is happening amidst a questionable peace process. It splinters Afghan government forces besides making a mockery of the sacrifices of its forces deployed there. For the emboldened Taliban this was just the opening they were looking for to stamp its presence. The poorly planned withdrawal announced by Biden might very likely boomerang if the Taliban and its terrorist allies manage to overwhelm Afghan forces. By all accounts that appears to be writing on the wall and if they manage to do that on or by 9/11, it will be terrible embarrassment for the Americans. The simple cue on the Soviet Union's exit and its aftermath should have been enough to indicate what might happen if the current trajectory is not checked. 

The US withdrawal could well lead to a similar situation -- devastating civil war and an eventual takeover by extremist hardliners. Taliban's recent moves suggest that it is positioning itself to wait out the occupation and strike at Kabul which is what the Mujahideen did to the Soviet Union in 1989. If this likely scenario transpires, Afghans who cooperated with allied forces with their stakeholders would be at risk. NATO cannot just disengage itself at this juncture just because there is an overly optimistic assessments by the American forces. The US cannot be a mute spectator as the Afghan forces cave in without putting up even a semblance of fight.

The Taliban is playing a smarter game this time by controlling and closing off the northern borders as well as on the Iranian side to prevent the growth of any Northern Alliance-like formation. I don't give the Afghans more than a few weeks before they crumble. The field is left clear with most foreign countries having pulled out. 

The resurgence of Taliban has ominous developments for New Delhi. It has activated support from Pakistan's terror groups like Lashkar-e-Toiba. India’s early engagement with post-Taliban Afghanistan was considered by the United States, Pakistan and the Afghan government to be a strategy to undermine Pakistan. While this may have been true at first, in recent years, India has come to accept that Pakistan has a special interest in Afghanistan that overshadows its own.

The algorithm has changed now. As Afghanistan meanders from bad to worst, it has moved from being a place where extremists co-existed and used terrorism to make a political statement on international scale to where radical ideologues are fighting for dominance. India seriously needs to rethink its long-standing approach towards the country. The premise that an external friendly power would do all the heavy lifting in Afghanistan will not work. For India, it should boil down to viewing Taliban as a Pakistan-sponsored entity that could intensify the insurgency in Kashmir.

It would be sound diplomatic practice for India to try to shape the contours of dialogue with the Afghan Taliban, regardless of who brokers this dialogue. It will allow India to support its partners in Kabul in maintaining an upper hand at the negotiation table and ensure India’s policy aim of maintaining a strategic balance between Afghanistan and Pakistan. However, I also anticipate India's pitch could well be queered by China providing economic aid to a bankrupt Afghan regime. The issue of Uighur Muslims may not be a deterrent in their bonhomie with the Taliban but then China might watch how the show unfolds before they throw their dice. 

Pakistan will not want to watch from the sidelines if Taliban does take over. It will gleefully become an interface between Taliban and China if and when it comes to that. They will seek to shape the contours of power equations to have some control over the Taliban and make sure that China does not snub them by dealing with the Taliban directly. In the midst of this rigmarole, Afghanistan will remain a case of "begaani shaadi mein Abdulle deewane."

An evening spent with Dilip Kumar, the icon on Indian cinema's desktop

Raju Korti
I will never forget my first and only bearing of the Mohammed Yusuf Khan Ghulam Sarwar Khan Peshawari in 1984. The name might confound the new generation whose memories do not stretch beyond  Dilip Kumar's films like Shakti or Saudagar. It was a 'mushaira'  session and Dilip Kumar had decorously chosen to squat on the floor in the true spirit of the event. The mushaira held little interest for me as I was among the legion who knew of his prowess to hold forth with his impeccable Urdu diction. He was equally profound with English and Hindi as I found later after that long one-on-one. 

Sketch by Bhagvan Das

I had handed over my press card to him through one of the organizers and he was gracious enough to acknowledge it with an eye contact right in the midst of reciting an ornamental shayari that came so effortlessly from his literary repositories. I referred to the eye contact because in my considered belief, he was probably the only actor whose eyes spoke eloquently. The rest of the body language just fell in unison. That made up for a devastating combination of the man's histrionics, now part of legendary folklores.

True to his reputation he had arrived well over two hours late and I remember incensed and impatient people had started wondering if the organizers had taken them for a ride. But as some people in the restive crowd had started making their way to the exit, in walked Dilip Kumar, his hands touching his forehead in a theatrical 'aadaab'. It was a measure of his ability to cast a hypnotic spell on the audience that they quickly retraced their steps followed by a hushed silence that could be only explained how he overawed people. He had sensed the mood of the audience with his decades experience as an unsurpassed actor. He was dressed in a Lungi and Kurta and his apple-peach complexion glowed and stood out in the maze of people on the stage.

The programme went on till 4 but more than half way through, he exited the stage and I thought my meeting had fizzled out in thin air. Just as I was grappling with my predicament, an organizer nudged me and told me 'Yusufbhai aap se milenge.' I saw him in his room sitting the same way. There was a twinkle in his eyes as he beckoned me to sit with a 'khushamdeed' -- khu and deed pronounced with the flourish and weight of a true Urdu stickler.

He looked at me amused when I told him that in the trinity that he formed with Dev Anand and Raj Kapoor, he was the Vishnu, Raj Kapoor the Mahesh and Dev Anand the Brahma. "I don't know what makes you say this but I can guess. We were all made up differently though we found our roots in the same profession. We all started a few years plus minus of each other but grew and evolved with a cinematic vision that defined us in a distinct way.

Explaining his metamorphosis from a method and serious actor in the late forties to one who got a little melodramatic towards the later sixties with the fifties as the fulcrum of his landmark performances, Dilip Kumar told me with the same intense, understated expression that had become  archetypal: "My career gradient has seen seamless transitions. From my first film Jwarbhata (1944), I charted some serious roles. Milan, Jugnu, Shaheed, Mela, Andaz, Jogan, Aarzoo, Deedar, Daag, Sangdil, Shikast, Tarana, Footpath, Devdas got me the sobriquet of 'Tragedy King.' I think it has something to do with my resilience with tragedies. In my formative years, I struggled to look after a huge family of in-laws, cousins and other close relatives. Life can be tough and that teaches you to be plaint. Maybe that reflected in my screen disposition."

"Sometimes in mid-fifties you changed track with the likes of Naya Daur, Yahudi, Madhumati, Kohinoor, Mughal-e-Azam, Gunga Jumna, Leader and Ram aur Shyam where your character was less overbearing. You took on lighter roles. Kohinoor, Leader and Ram aur Shyam were actually out and out comedies. How did you enter these skins with the same aplomb?" Dilip Kumar smiled the same mischievous smile that was evident in 'Nain lad jai hai to manwa ma kasak hui bekari'. "Even if there is an opportunity to school yourself in different characters -- characters that have distinct personalities which may be totally different from yours, you have got to completely divorce your own personality to be able to go over to the other personality."       

I do not think that any actor has unfolded the spectrum of acting that Dilip Kumar did. From the drunken, bloodshot-eyed Devdas to the pompous and ceremonious Prince Salim of Mughal-e-Azam, to the eternal romanticist of Madhumati, to the desperate crippled of Aadmi, to the outrageous buffoon in Ram aur Shyam and the over-the-top character in Shakti, Saudagar, Mazdoor and Kranti.His roles resonated in the rotund voice of Rafi through 'Peete peete kabhi kabhi yun jaam badal jaate hai.' The heady concoction was served for sixty five plus years on celluloid.

Nostalgic about the songs that he got to lip synch in the prime of his career, Dilip Kumar considered himself lucky to get the fare he did. "The equations were set in those days. It was Shanker-Jaikishen and Raj Kapoor and SD Burman and Dev(Anand). So it was Naushad mia, Rafisaab and Shakeel (Badayuni) who took up cudgels for me. Initially, Talat (Mehmood) mia who had become my voice but you see how the film music climbed from the subdued low to the screaming high. When Rafisaab took over after his Baiju Bawra success, he was singing in low pitch but he started hitting high notes with Amar (1954) onward. If you would have seen us playing badminton together, you would have seen how well we gelled with each other. Shakeelsaab kalaam likhe, Naushadmia tarz banaaye aur Rafisaab gaaye!"  

Regretting the little fallout with Rafi who was perhaps as blessed in stature, Dilip Kumar said "He (Mohammed Rafi) was a Man of God. Nothing against Kishore but I admit 'Saala mai to saab ban gaya' (Sagina Mahato-1970) looked jarring on me. The status quo was restored with 'Sukh ke sab saathi  (Gopi) and 'Na tu zameen ke liye hai' (Dastaan). It spoke volumes about the three legendary personalities of Indian cinema that they never washed dirty linen in public.

I remember the controversy Dilip Kumar had courted in the mid-eighties when he chose to marry Asma because his marriage with reigning actress and beauty queen Saira Banu was rumored to be fledgling because of the age differences between them. After a lot of dithering, Dilip Kumar came clean and divorced his new wife. As the in-charge of Page One that day, I had carried the story as a box item given the public interest it had generated. However that chapter of his life as also the much spoken about love affair with Madhubala were of no concern to me. Love affairs in the film industry have nothing to offer than some prurient quotient.

Dilip Kumar fondly reminisced how he had reached out to people other than those from his fraternity. "Bal Thackeray was a special friend. We were a mutual admiration club. There were times when I would impromptu gate-crash into his house. We would sit on the terrace of his house and discuss this and that over red wine and a very tasty 'chakna' (a starter) his wife Meenatai would rustle up with boiled peanuts, finely chopped onions, tomatoes and lime. In fact, I so much loved this starter that I remember eating it days on end at home. Contrary to what most people think, our political views never came in between our friendship." Unfortunately, towards the late nineties that was no longer true as Thackeray had rubbished him uncharitably after he was conferred the Nishan-e-Pakistan by the Pakistan government. To Dilip Kumar's credit he did not let his dignity to come in the way in the way of what could have been a slanging match. He matched the depth of his flawless articulation with poise that many in the industry today dreadfully lack.

As someone who was passionate about football, Dilip Kumar, a product of the Khalsa College, could have well donned the cap. "At times, I was more possessed as a footballer than as an actor. My outlet found it's way on the various grounds across Mumbai -- Shivaji Park mostly. I would hop out of my car and join any match in progress much to the amusement and appreciation of the participants. They would be surprised I could dribble through and pack a lethal kick. If you allow fame to get the better of you, you become nuisance, a public nuisance, a nuisance as a friend, as a member of the family, a nuisance to yourself. So I let myself go whenever I saw people playing football."

The Dilip Kumar psyche can be understood in this context. "My becoming an actor was more a twist of tale than a chosen course because I dared not to think I could ever become an actor. I couldn't even walk up on the stage and say 'Thank You' when we were to receive trophies at our sports meets at college." How he refined himself with time to deliver those weighty speeches is another story.

It is not my case here to deal with his life that is already in public domain. For that matter, I don't know if I have contributed anything new about his persona and professional life. As he is interred in the same Juhu cemetery where other icons have also been laid to rest -- Meena Kumari, Mohammed Rafi, Madhubala, Sahir Ludhianvi, Naushad, Ali Sardar Jaffri, Talat Mehmood, Jan Nisar Akhtar to name a few -- Dilip Kumar will be in the august company.

Having lived a full life of 98 years, it probably had to be his alter ego Rafi who sang this for him much before his own untimely demise in 1980. The voice and words are tailor-made for Dilip Kumar:

आज पुरानी राहों से कोई मुझे आवाज़ ना दे
दर्द में डूबे गीत ना दे, ग़म का सिसकता साज़ ना दे
बीते दिनों की याद थी जिन में, मैं वो तराने भूल चूका
आज नई मंज़िल है मेरी, कल के ठिकाने भूल चूका
ना वो दिल ना सनम, ना वो दिन धरम
अब दूर हूँ सारे गुनाहों से
टूट चुके सब प्यार के बंधन, आज कोई जंजीर नहीं
शीशा-ए-दिल में अरमानों की, आज कोई तस्वीर नहीं
अब शाद हूँ मैं, आज़ाद हूँ मैं 
कुछ काम नहीं है आहों से
पहुँचा हूँ वहाँ, नहीं दूर जहाँ 
भगवान भी मेरी निगाहों से

Raju Korti
In my 41 years as mediaperson, I have come across a category of people that has a special talent for stating the obvious. It occurs fairly equally in high and low intelligence people. Even with the specious argument that what is obvious to one may not be obvious to the other, it has the potential to make a dumbass of others. But the hilarity of not understanding what you say and believing the other people don't understand or  realize makes the irony delicious.

In 1982 I was into third year on my job and had been just elevated as the Shift In-charge of Page One. It was actually baptism by fire. From rewriting mofussil stories I was suddenly asked to do Page One on the day the union budget was presented. The stories from the wire and correspondents were coming in thick and fast. Those were the days when pages were being made manually on the Lino and the editor in-charge had to not only edit Page One stories, he also had to design the page. When I entered the newsroom around 8 pm, I saw my desk flooded with agency copies. 

Since, I knew fairly well what went into the making of the budget, I was confident of putting the edition to bed by the stipulated deadline. Before I could take my seat, a senior colleague of mine told me "Boss, aaj budget hai." I hid my sarcasm and asked him, Oh, is it? 

This colleague had a habit of reminding me the most important development of the day, especially  when I would be handling Page One. When the ethnic conflict broke out in Sri Lanka, he told me in his charitable tone "Boss, aaj Lanka ka story hai." If I had shouted "yes", I am sure LTTE chief V Prabhakaran would have heard it in Jaffna. But I let that pass.

Over a period, I acquired the reputation of a newsmaker in whose Page One shifts something shattering would invariably happen. My colleague would take a great delight in telling me what were the lead stories of the day. He sincerely believed I had zero news sense. On the night of 2-3rd December 1984, as I walked into the newsroom he sported his trademark benign smile and said "Boss, aaj Bhopal gas tragedy ki story hai." A year later, it was "Boss, aaj Indira ka assassination hua hai." 

"Boss, aaj railway accident ki story hai, Boss aaj Rajiv (Gandhi) cabinet ki story hai...." the list is countless. The only redeeming feature of these serial episodes was being addressed as "Boss" which was seemingly used out of habit. I do not recollect when this stopped but somewhere along the line, he realized I wasn't as dumb as he thought.

Stating the obvious has its own advantages. It fills up news space and talk time. Our erudite folks on the television have fine-tuned the art. "Aap ko kaisa lag raha hai?" is a universal question for all occasions and tragedies. The English version of 'stating the obvious' found a regional version in 'Zaahir si baat hai.." The obvious is consolidated by the camera which has better quality than the accompanying journalist. 

Lifestyle publications and channels have made a living out of inane questions. Food vloggers and anchors are sound so profound when they shoot questions like:Ye hotel aap ne kab se shuru kiya?

Iska matlab hai, aap ki teen peedhiyan is line me hai.

 

 

Of Imran Khan's servility and Chinese belligerence

Raju Korti

Xi addressing the Communist Party centenary.

While the Chinese President Xi Jinping has been flexing his muscles to lend a melodramatic touch to the centenary celebrations of the Communist Party and the world watching in mild amusement, he has a condescending but helpless admirer in Imran Khan. The Pakistan prime minister has justified the common Indian line Majboori ka naam Mahatma Gandhi by 'accepting' the Chinese version of how it treats ethnic Uighur Muslims. There are more than 12 million Uighurs living a lowly life in Xinjiang.

On a sticky wicket in his own country, Khan has no other option but to toe the Chinese line. It is a no brainer that he is forced to franchise what the Chinese are doing to the sizable chunk of Uighur Muslim population being subjected to ethnic cleansing in southern Xinjiang. The Amnesty International has said the Uighur Muslims whose roots are Turkish, are living in a "dystopian hellscape". So much so that while being systematically eliminated, they are not even allowed to practice Islam and speak their mother tongue. For that matter, China's utter disdain for Muslims has been well documented, but Khan doesn't bat an eyelid, incommoded  as his country is under China's obligation. China has constantly denied the allegations of genocide in Xinjiang camps where the Uighurs have been languishing. But both China and Pakistan know exactly what's happening and both are lying to their teeth.   

Khan disguises his helplessness with a political expediency that he can do nothing about. It is a measure of his crooked bent of mind that instead he chose to divert the human rights abuse issue to Pakistan's pet peeve Kashmir. In a statement clearly meant to appease the Chinese, he says, "Islamabad accepts 'Chinese version' of how it treats Uighur Muslims because of its extreme proximity and relationship with Beijing." While in the past, China has snubbed Pakistan several times on the issue of providing economic aid, it is not clear how much the latter has benefited from the arms aid.

There is not much to establish that Pakistan, partitioned on religion and now an Islamic state run on Shariah, has concern for Muslims across the world unless there is a over-riding political reason. It does not shed tears for Muslims in India as they know they are better off in India than the rickety country. As Xi spoke about the "alternative model" that has beaten all Western democracies, Khan quickly latched on to the Western media saying it was hypocritical of them to talk only about the Chinese situation. The Chinese must be chuckling that they are now licensed to intensify their state-orchestrated campaign against the Uighurs without pretensions.

In their persecution, the Uighurs suffer unlivable conditions, torture, forced sterilizations, coercive birth prevention and sexual violence inside the camps and are subjected to institutionalized enslavement. They will be wiped out sooner than later. There is no way the issue can be taken to the International Court of Justice as China does not recognize its authority or jurisdiction. China has also denied foreign observers access to Xinjiang. It has lost on Khan -- or that is what he pretends to -- China's track record of targeting Muslim religious figures and banning religious practices as well as destroying mosques and tombs. Khan chooses to ignore all this and instead says the people of China have a special place in the hearts of Pakistanis.

I do not think Pakistan can get any tangible benefits from China's status as world's largest economy with largest foreign exchanges. No country can become an ally of China. Xi's model is characterized by an authoritarian political structure and state driven capitalism. I do not find it altogether surprising that the mild demeanored Xi arrogated to himself for lifetime all the powers by usurping the Communist Party of China (CPC) and People's Liberation Army (PLA). On April 8, 2020, I wrote: "As the central figure of the fifth generation of leadership of the People's Republic, Xi has significantly centralized institutional power by taking on a wide range of leadership positions. His political thoughts have been written into the party and state constitutions and his tenure has witnessed significant increase of censorship, mass surveillance and deterioration of human rights.

The least Khan could have done was to maintain a diplomatic silence when Xi was playing to the gallery addressing a captive audience at the CPC's centenary. The resolve in (henceforth) not allowing Pakistan's soil to be used by the American troops was nowhere in evidence. Khan badly needs better political advisors but then that is a tall order given that the entire country survives and sustains only on the Kashmir obsession.

On a lighter note, Khan's (helpless) appeasement of the Chinese reminds me of a Mukesh song "Jo tumko ho pasand wohi baat karenge, tum din ko agar raat kaho raat kahenge...." It also suits his nasal tone.