Aniruddha Babar
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Tetso College, Dimapur
Glimpses of the Indo-Naga relationship through review of the 213th Parliamentary Standing Committee report on security situation in the Northeast states in India are primarily reflective of the Naga peace talks, AFSPA and the Framework Agreement. In the following discussion, the highlights from the standing committee report would be identified in order to review the opportunities for strengthening security in the Northeast states and preventing the rise in insurgencies. Furthermore, this discussion would also provide insights into whether the relations with Nagas would be settled or solved through the Naga Peace Accord. Other necessary aspects that were identified in the report include contradictions of AFSPA in Assam which imply the limited requirement for AFSPA in the state as well as the committee’s dissent over the delay in peace talks.
The details of the standing committee report also focused on the role of the British in preventing the Naga tribesmen from interacting with the larger Indian society which would be traced back to the policies introduced by the British since the era of World War II. Thus the following discussion would aim to provide a critical summarization of all prominent aspects that were put forward in the 213th Parliamentary Standing Committee report on security situation in the Northeast states in India which would be referred to as ‘report’ or ‘standing committee report’ throughout the following discussion.
The report emphasized particularly on the Naga Peace Accord and the Framework Agreement and it is interesting to note that responses to the content of the report have been rather subservient. On one hand, Assam had depicted substantial apprehensions despite the Citizenship Bill and the National Register of Citizens assuming focal points in the report.
Manipur has depicted promising involvement in context of the Naga issue and irrespective of the comments made by the state Chief Minister N Biren Singh, an all-party meeting was called for in which Congress was the sole party to be missing. The report further highlighted profound security issues in the state of Arunachal Pradesh owing to the increasing patterns of insurgency in the eastern districts namely Changlang,Tirap and Longding which is nothing more than a spill over of ethnic conflict that engulfed the entire northeast region having Naga nationalist movement as a major current. Nagaland nationalist response to the standing committee report is the most interesting of all with only a press release issued by the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Isak-Muivah) (NSCN(IM)). Being one of the major security potholes for the Northeast states, Naga political issue was explicitly addressed in the report through a special chapter and involved the briefing of the committee by interlocutor of the Government of India for Naga peace talks, RN Ravi, regarding progress of the talks.
The interlocutor stated the agreement between the Government and the NSCN (IM) in 2015 which emphasized on the latter agreeing for a settlement within the Indian federation alongside being bestowed with special status. According to the interlocutor, this agreement depicted a promising deviation from the previous stance of ‘With India, Not Within India’ with the Government terming the agreement as the ‘Framework Agreement’ and signing it. Further exploration of the report states that the interlocutor informed the committee regarding the broad nature of the negotiations alongside focusing on the possible situation that can be a resultant of the negotiations which would involve no alteration or changes in the boundaries of the states.
The report also focused on the previous idea of the Nagas exemplified bythe demand of ‘no integration, no solution’ to which they adhered vehemently to support their idea of uniting all Naga inhabited areas. However, the report informed about the common understanding that has been reached by Nagas with the Government wherein the boundaries of any Northeast state would not be changed or altered with provisions for making special arrangements for the Nagas irrespective of their area of habitation. Presently, the only hints of discrepancies in the negotiations have been identified with respect to certain symbolic issues that are equally sensitive for the government as well as the Nagas and comprehensive efforts are being made for resolving the issues.
The Standing Committee report also included a special chapter pertaining to the operations of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA). Despite emphasizing on the positive outcomes associated with AFSPA’s withdrawal from Tripura, the report identified a strange anomaly in the state of Assam. It is observed that while the number of incidents associated with insurgency has been reduced substantially, the areas where AFSPA has been imposed have increased drastically.
The explanation for this paradox could be ascertained in various ways rather than being limited to the position of the presently nascent armed groups in the state. The most interesting aspect to be noted in this outcome highlighted by the standing committee report is the diversity of perceptions regarding the situation in Assam that has created profound ambiguities. It is imperative to observe that the Ministry of Home Affairs has verified the improvement in security situation in Assam albeit with an explicit increase in the area that has been declared ‘disturbed’ in accordance to the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act.
The situation could be considered as uniquely intriguing because of the role of the state government in expansion of the area under AFSPA rather than by a Union Government Notification. The report emphasized on the disparity in opinion between the State government and the Government of India regarding to areas declared as ‘disturbed’ in the state of Assam. Owing to concurrent power vested in the state government, they declared the whole state as disturbed area in accordance to the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act through a notification alongside providing explanation regarding the improbability of reducing the area subject to AFSPA notification.
The report also focused on the reasons for increase in armed movements in Assam especially in the formation of the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) and the start of its struggle for ‘sovereign socialist Assam’. The factors which were outlined in the standing committee report as the prime reasons for increasing armed group activity in Assam are unemployment, alleged human rights violation by armed forces, corruption in the governance framework, increasing trends of illegal migration, perception of exploitation of natural resources of the state by the Centre and the prominence of non-Assamese individuals in the domain of business. The report also focused on the prominence of the Bodo movement along the lines of the ULFA armed movement.
In terms of recommendations, the report provided some productive recommendations especially in context of resolving security situation in Northeast states especially with reference to Indo-Naga conflict through Peace talks which will have natural impact all over northeast region. The committee issued the recommendations in accordance to the Naga Peace Accord for the three neighbouring states of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh. The first recommendation refers to the provision of consistently informing the state governments of Nagaland, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh regarding all developments that are made in the negotiations. The committee’s recommendation also included ensuring that rehabilitation packages provided to the states would completely decimate the probabilities for emergence of another Naga insurgency. Finally, the committee emphasized on arriving at the settlement as early as possible especially due to the rise in dissent among Nagas due to delays in settlement. Another interesting aspect that has been identified in the report is the involvement of British policies in promoting isolation of the Naga tribes from mainstream Indian society that may be identified as one of the major responsible factors in a larger part for the existing security problems in Northeast states especially due to Naga insurgence and other armed movements.
