DIMAPUR, FEBRUARY 10 (MExN): The N Kitovi Zhimomi led Working Committee, Naga National Political Groups (NNPGs) has questioned the “wisdom” of the 21 Rajya Sabha MPs with regard to their recent letter to Union Home Minister Amit Shah demanding the appointment of a permanent interlocutor for the Indo-Naga talks and that details about the status of the talks in Parliament.
A press release from the WC NNPGs, while Committee appreciating the concern of the 21 MPs, however, stated that “emphasizing the pressing issue only on Framework agreement is a total ignorance of the ground reality.”
“There were two mutually agreed agreements that is the Agreed Position and Framework Agreement between GoI and Working Committee, NNPGs on November 17, 2017 and of NSCN (IM) on August 3, 2015 respectively,” it reminded. It stated that these are essential to bring about a peaceful solution to the long-protracted Indo-Naga conflict. “Overlooking the hard-earned agreement called the ‘Agreed Position’ seems ignorant on the part of the 21 MPs as it contradicts the agreements rather coming to an acceptable conclusion,” the WC NNPGs stated.
It further urged the 21 MPs to be aware that simply demanding a new interlocutor without knowing the detail ground reality is “nothing but to delay the solution when talks have been thoroughly discussed and mutually completed on October 31, 2019 when Nagas are anticipating for early solution.”
The WC NNPGs reminded the MPs that during the session of the Nagaland Legislative Assembly on January 17, 2020, the Governor of Nagaland had addressed the house, stating that the negotiation which was going on for years between the Government of India and Naga National Political Groups has been successfully concluded on October 31, 2019.
“And subsequently under the Convenorship of P Chidambaram of the Parliamentary Standing Committee, the Naga Peace Accord was submitted to the Rajya Sabha on July 19, 2018. The same was submitted to the Lok Sabha on the same date,” it said.
Further, the WC NNPGs claimed that the Government of India “reached an understanding with the NSCN (IM), which agreed for a settlement within the Indian federation, with a special status.” “The Interlocutor informed the committee that this was a departure from their earlier position of ‘with India, not within India.’ Therefore, the question of new interlocutor does not arise unless there is any new agenda to be included in the agreement,” it said.
The WC appealed to the 21 MPs to “carry forward their valuable support in honouring both the agreements for achieving a peaceful, honourable, acceptable inclusive solution.”
