Sanjay (Xonzoi) Barbora
The recently concluded Worship of Celebration and Commitment (WCC) to commemorate the 9th anniversary of the signing of the Covenant of Reconciliation (CoR) organised by the Forum for Naga Reconciliation (FNR) on June 13, 2018 in Dimapur, was a unique event for several reasons. For Naga people and those living in Naga territories, the initiatives of FNR, especially those that culminated in the signing of the CoR by various Naga National Organisations are a significant departure from the usual lack of transparency that accompanies peace-building initiatives by the state and civil society in the region.
As someone who teaches the benefits of peace, as well as the difficulties involved in the politics of reconciliation, it is not hard to see how the current efforts are encouraging a whole new generation of young people to think about the future. Indeed, those growing up in Naga territories following the ceasefire that was signed between the government of India and the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (NSCN), would not be expected to remember the decades of conflict that defined everyday life. Instead, many of them would have been more acquainted with the internecine violence that marked the growing divisions among the national groups, as also among members of Naga civil society. In this, the Naga experience was no different from other societies that had experienced protracted armed conflict. In most places around the world – South Africa, Liberia, Colombia, the Caucasus – political conflict involving insurgents and powerful armies of modern states, had resulted in the creation of a spectrum of resolutions. One end would have been outright decimation of insurgent politics (as in Sri Lanka), while the other would be one where former insurgents are able to free their country and take charge of their own affairs (as in Timor-Leste).
Most conflicts however fall somewhere along the spectrum and risk the possibility of falling off the media spotlight. The effects of such processes are always brutal and tragic. In the course of official ceasefires, insurgent communities often turn the violence inwards. Even as they stop fighting a more powerful enemy, guerrilla troops who enter into negotiations with governments are unable to stop the process of armed combatants turning against one another. They are also unable to deal with the hurt and pain that comes when communities have to live with those who perpetrated acts of violence against its members. At such times, the weight of the past is unbearable, as each individual in a broken society try to keep hopes of justice alive. One of ancient Rome’s historians, Publius Tacitus, likened the past to an abattoir, or slaughterhouse where peace is just the desolation that the powerless felt when they had been defeated. There are many in contemporary times that might find grains of truth in such thoughts, as those in power find it convenient to forget the deep-rooted pain that societies overcoming violence have to live with.
Hence, the efforts of FNR to create new, just ways to speak about the past and think about a shared future, are among the most important features of the WCC event mentioned in the opening paragraph of this piece. These efforts attest to the remarkable capacity of the human spirit to reason and learn from the mistakes of earlier generations. It no longer imprisons survivors of violence in the dark recesses of the past. It helps them live in the present and accords them the dignity that comes with honest dialogues about injustices that were committed against them. Forgiveness, so often thought of as the loser’s gallant gesture, becomes a meaningful movement towards new political possibilities. I was particularly moved by the wisdom of Visasier Kevichusa, who said “…if our memories of the past are greater than the dreams for our future, then we are already dying”. The success of the WCC can only be measured many years in the future, when historians look back on our time and how we, as a society, handled difficult truths about violent histories. We will then be judged by how appropriately we have been able to respond to Kevichusa’s profound, moving plea for reconciliation, forgiveness and justice.
(The author teaches at the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Guwahati Campus. Views expressed may not reflect those of the Centre or other organisations that the author belongs to.)
