Charles Chasie
The Proposal for healing and reconciliation of the Naga people released by the Nagaland Baptist Church Council (NBCC) on September 29, in Dimapur, one thinks, is a most important document at this point in time that ought to be exercising the minds of the Naga people. It is as complete and thought-through document as any that one has come across in the affairs of the Nagas. It is apparent that much agonizing discussion over the issues involved and wide consultations with different sections of the people have taken place before the proposal has been placed before the Nagas for discussion.
The proposal first establishes the NBCC’s own position so that there is no ambiguity about where it stands and why it is involved in the healing and reconciliation work. It goes on to summarize the NBCC’s understanding of the main events of recent Naga political history, how and where the divisions began and the issues facing the Nagas today. Finally, it offers its suggestions of possible ways for collective exploration and search forward so that the Nagas can become a family again. The 40-page proposal booklet (including covers) also contains some examples of real life stories in other entrenched situations which should serve as useful guides in our people’s search for breakthroughs.
It is quite possible that the document may fall short in the eyes of some people or in other eyes it has gone too far. Still others may not fully agree or even disagree with one or more of the NBCC’s understanding/reading of the events and our situation. And so on. In a democracy, everyone is entitled to his/her views. And these must all be brought out in the open so that the debate is enriched. What we all, perhaps, need to spare a little thought for is whether our views are prompted by a desire to move society forward and secure the future of our coming generations or they are simply hurdles put in the way of others, prompted by our own cynicism in a situation we see little hope.
What is deserving of respect are the obvious transparency of the NBCC proposal and the genuineness of the concern of the Baptist Church for Naga society. The document itself does not claim that whatever has been stated in it is right and must be accepted. Indeed, it asks to be corrected where wrong. And this itself breathes fresh air into the Naga atmosphere where every group and faction is claiming to speak for the Naga people and demanding that everyone ought to agree and support with whatever stand such group/faction has proposed/taken!
The NBCC proposal clearly states that the purpose of the document is to launch a “platform” and start the process of open discussion for everyone to “freely express their opinion”, often a missing factor in Naga society due to fear and/or other reasons. What the NBCC, as a responsible parental body in society, has done is the difficult and painful but necessary job of laying out its protective mantle for open debate and free discussion for all in society.
The document establishes, among other things, the following:-
1. The primacy of the Naga people before all else, including groups and factions which source of power is the people.
2. All groups and sections of the people are equally important and needed.
3. All issues over which the Nagas are divided are equally important and deserves equal attention
4. To heal Naga society it needs the combined and concerted efforts of everyone.
On the above, the document is clear and uncompromising. The NBCC speaks with authority which lends credibility to the integrity of its proposal. Pursued with conviction, and support and cooperation of everyone, it would raise hopes of possible breakthroughs in the long chain of thorny impasses.
With our divisions and threats and killings all the time, we have managed to tear asunder not only the fabric of our society but also worn very thin, or destroyed, the credibilities of the few institutions and bodies that could bring our people back together. Critical structures in society are mindlessly trampled underfoot in the march to personal/group power, wealth and fame. The Church is the one institution left that is still largely intact. And seized with this sense of responsibility, the NBCC has come out with its “proposal”, knowing fully well it will have to brave the inclements of our people’s attitudes and mindsets. What everyone, and especially the factions, must know in their hearts is that this effort of the NBCC might prove to be a significant last opportunity of its kind for our people in the search for a workable and lasting peace – at least for some time to come!
We are wont to be effected by events and go by surface readings, human as we all are. We also tend to look at situations, and the world, through our individual cultural telescopes! These are common traits with everyone and extra baggage that we all carry, even without being conscious that we do actually carry such baggage with us! This is why it is important that we always try to remain `sensitive’ to one another. In our Naga situation, for instance, we need to be conscious that often attitudes become more important than issues, even ideological ones, and it is usually the “undercurrents” that “move” the events above on the surface! The Naga tribal, in this instance, is not as simplistic as he looks, deliberate or not, and has managed to baffle the Indian polity for well over half a century and with potential, though not obvious, to continue to do so. Nothing short of greatness and healing history may finally settle the Naga National Question, the first and continuing challenge to Indian nation-building, and, indeed, Nationhood! It will require/demand men and women with a sense of history and occasion on all sides, and not simply clever, manipulative politicians in the garb of statesmen. Lest anyone misunderstand what I have stated here, this is not to belittle anyone. Indeed, from my perspective, I have said this in friendship and for the sake of “legacies” and future generations!
Finally, in recent Naga political history, we have had the 9 Points Hydari Agreement of 1947, the 16-Points Agreement of 1960 and the Shillong Accord of 1975 to draw valuable lessons from. Each faction, as well as `Over-ground’ political party and key mass-based NGOs too, must have worked out its assessments of these Agreements. What are the lessons?! Are we prepared to learn from them or do we keep on repeating the mistakes of history while keeping our consciences `satisfied’ with slogan shouting? The answer lies with each of us and within us all. Unless we all respond in a positive manner, solution to the Naga Issue will remain a dream! What choice do we make? Happily, unlike in some cases where we have no choice at all, there is a choice here for all of us.
