The agenda of the political negotiation between GOI and NSCN(IM) is opaque to many of the rest of the stakeholders. Except the negotiating parties, the rest are kept in the dark about the points of negotiation. All those who are not on board of negotiation are left with the option of speculation and not beyond. Somebody brands the negotiation to be non-transparent. Indeed, Nagas are confused too, because of the fact that there had been claims followed by refutations between negotiators. For instance, to GOI, integration and sovereignty are not negotiable. But to NSCN(IM), solution is ‘ruled out’ ‘without Naga integration and sovereignty’ as quoted from Nagaland Page dated 16.3.2016. NSCN(IM) claimed that separate flag for Nagas is one of the points and the next day, the Interlocutor, RN Ravi denied to have discussed about it.
On the other hand, the option of either to confide with other stakeholders on the agenda by negotiators is at their disposal. Except raising concern for the issue of unity on the periphery by concerned individuals and groups, none attempted to use imposition on anyone. This option has bothered FNR to come out with statement that the ongoing political negotiation is ‘characterized only as Indo-NSCN(IM),(and) not an Indo-Naga settlement’. What FNR visualized is the ground reality. The option is everybody’s liberty and right. To keep the agenda concealed from the other stakeholders by negotiators is their convenient option, so is the option of the other stakeholders to stay away from it too. The option in question is the old ‘German Wall’ between Naga groups.
Meanwhile, Nagaland Congress blamed Govt. of Nagaland of talking about political negotiation without having knowledge on solution. Yet, it is irrational to conclude that 60 MLAs of NLA do not have an iota of idea about agenda for solution. Nagaland Page dated 16.3.2016 disclosed that ‘It was also understood that the State (Nagaland) Government was briefed about the points of negotiation. But the Government is not willing to disclose the contents of the negotiation despite demand from certain quarters including militant groups’. A week has passed since this news was brought to light, and Nagaland Govt. remains silent. Meaning that the facilitator, the Govt. of Nagaland, has the knowledge of the contents of the agenda.
Whereas, even in the ‘consultative meet’ on 9.3.2016 at Police Complex, Chumukedima between Legislators and few Naga Political Groups, the Parliamentary Working Committee (PWC) reportedly acted ignorant of the contents of the agenda. Whereas, after a week of the said meeting, Nagaland Page splashed the news that State Govt was briefed already on the agenda. It is for anyone to speculate as to whether State Govt. was apprised of it prior to ‘consultative meet’ and yet decided to act slyly or given briefing after the meeting.
For the sake of a genuine peace post solution, placing the agenda in the public domain is a prerequisite. In fact, not only the contents but the vocabularies and construction of the language used in such an important agreement warrants thorough scrutiny of all stakeholders prior to assent. It is therefore imperative that Nagaland Govt. shares what it has in its kitty with all concern for the sake of removing the barrier and pave the way for inclusive participation.
Watching the kind of developments taking place, I tend to imagine as to whether Nagas have political solution phobia. In other words, are we afraid of having solution? If yes, there may be few reasons for which the Naga nationalists, the Naga State politicians, the Naga businessmen and the bureaucrats, barring God fearing honest ones, may have similar hidden agenda. The solution may upset the established trend of business transaction in Nagaland today. For the upper strata of society, be it over-ground or underground, what is the detrimental trend existing against the absolute majority of common man is the golden goose. When solution arrives, certain degree of polarization may follow whereby in many areas the shortcut to enjoying the golden eggs may be hampered. Work and eat may have to be applied in lieu of the present fashion of eating without work.
Nagaland is not bereft of honest people. Nevertheless, the hitch is how to locate those honest people who are having zeal for saving Nagaland from total destruction with concerted action. One may not be indulging in anti-people activities and yet when we do not voice or act against such crimes we all are equally responsible for what mess we are in.
Z. Lohe
