I am a freelance political analyst, with great concern for peace in Nagaland. Without any hesitation, I'd like to admit that I have a high regard for your scholastic achievements and your outstanding contribution towards the Nagas in the field of education. With due respect, may I take the liberty to express my opinion and seek your substantiated view through this paper in regard to the subject of discussion which you have initiated.
2. It's been months since you published your article- "A Confession" in the local daily of Nagaland. Interestingly, many commended that you had taken a bold step towards reconciliation. Some even went to the extend of recommending this to be a model to follow suit. However, there are still others for whom your confessions turned out to be venomous. The NSCN came down heavily on the so called bombastic statements, refuting every point of your confession. To this I do not have any comment. You also appeared before the Tangkhul Naga Long (TNL) and for reasons well known to you, the unprecedented verdict of 'ex-communication' was issued against you, which literally shocked the whole Naga communities. The saga of controversy continues and I am afraid, the aura has not completely died out. If this was what you intended for in the first place, you have somehow succeeded in creating a ripple in the turbulent sea. I am here, not as an authority to condemn or to endorse the decision of the TNL; Neither do I write to justify nor to refute anybody's viewpoint. Taking your article as a literary piece which got entangled in the Naga imbroglio, I am making a humble attempt to unwind, analyze and try to reorient the essence of confession in the spirit of a Christian.
3. You are a venerable elder, a revered priest, a doctor of Theology and an esteemed educator. Allow me to quote some of the relevant instances of confessions with which you are well versed. When Nehemiah heard about the problems faced by the Isrealites, the conflict of the remnant Jews with those who returned from exile and about the broken wall of Jerusalem, he mourned and fasted for days. He was not making any accusation against his fellow Jews; he did not condemn the tribe of Judah. It was a prayerful supplication before the God of Heaven, confessing the sins the Isrealites had committed including himself and his family. Nehemiah's confession is a testimony of God's healing of an ailing nation through a sincere prayer of a humble servant. On the other hand, the confession of St. Augustine was his own autobiography, recounting his sins, the inequities in his self and the lustful nature of the flesh with which he had to constantly struggle. The Church took a strong exception to his vulgar confession, terming it to be defiling and defaming the sanctity of priesthood. Nevertheless, his writing is considered one of the most influential book in the early Christian era that changed the perspective on the indepth understanding of human nature.
4. I do not rule out the horizontal aspect of confession. Of course, it pays well when we say 'Sorry" to one another for wrong doings. In fact, taking an independent initiative to admit one's own mistake is seen as a positive step towards transforming relationships. There are instances in the history of the world too when confessions were made in the form of political statements. The Papacy in the nineteenth century, tendered an official apology to the Muslims for the war crimes committed during the Crusades. Although the statement was made centuries after the event, this open confession, to a large extent helped reduce collective hatred and vengeful attitudes among the Christian and Muslim communities. Likewise, the White Australians launched a 'Sorry' Campaign in 2000 apologizing to the Aboriginal Minorities for the centuries of subjugation and maltreatment. These are some of the epoch-making confessions that changed the face of peacemaking and brought reconciliation among mutually hostile communities.
5. Against this backdrop, let us re-examine your article. You opened up with a skepticism about 'confession' itself; then you pointed out exclusively the wrong doings, misdeeds and whatever unsolicited actions of the Tangkhuls, identifying them with the NSCN. Forgive me if my opinion does not concur with yours on second thought, but I could not see any wisdom in the terminology that you carelessly or advertently used: Tangkhul (I-M). There was a time when the Angamis spearheaded the Naga National movement but I have not come across any usage as Angami (NNC). The gist is that, whichever tribe may be taking the leadership, it will be wrong to identify the movement on tribal lines. For, the Angamis alone, or the Tangkhuls for that matter does not own the National Movement. If my reading is not wrong, the media is responsible for suffixing the letters K and IM after the respective leaders in order to differentiate the two NSCNs. Interestingly, the NSCNs too seem to be comfortable with these connotations. In a recent development, there appears in the media another name IK used by the NSCN (K) to identify the rival faction. I don't know what exactly IK stands for and I don't either see any positive point in this trend of branding names against one another. At this scenario, creating the term Tangkhul (I-M) is adding salt to the wound. You also went on to say 'sorry' to all who have been hurt by the Tangkhul(I-M), deeming yourself obligated and implicated. Let me not question the responsibility that you may own or the legitimacy that you have earned, for you claimed that you were 'inspired'. But let me ask you a very blunt question: What is your idea of "Confession"?
6. When Jesus narrated the parable of "The Lost Son", he was aware of the presence of the Pharisees among the audience. He was trying to bring home the virtues of forgiveness and acceptance without any condition. At the same time, he was warning against jealousy borne out of a self righteous mindset and unforgiving heart. Very often we focussed on the prodigal son as the central character of the parable. Of course, his realisation of his own folly was the turning point. However, before he could utter a single word of confession, his father was waiting there with open arms accepting him just as his son, no matter how bad he had been hurt by the son's action. Jesus wants us to be like the forgiving father. And in this atmosphere, confession becomes just a ceremonial procedure. In all its essence, ACCEPTANCE must precede CONFESSION. When the Nagas from outside the Nagaland State are treated as "second class", "underprivilege" and "wannabe" Nagas; when the Tangkhuls are not accepted as Naga brethrens; when the National workers do not accept one another, what good will the call for "confession" do? Who among us is the prodigal son? Let us be the ever forgiving and accepting father, as Jesus taught us: Lest we end up ourselves 'the other brother'.
With malice towards none and commitment to work for peace and reconciliation among Naga brethrens, I admit I am a Naga Nationalist.
Syo Peh Kwo
Research Student Delhi.
(spk_wo@yahoo.co.in)
