Z Lohe
Kohima
While every right thinking citizen in Nagaland understands the indispensability of the Naga political solution for the Nagas in general and for the survival of Nagaland in particular, and questions why the GoI inordinately delays the process of solution even after 2 years of the official closure of the negotiations since 31st October, 2019, the Core Committee on Naga Political Issue of the infamous UDA is found playing the role not of the facilitator but of a negotiator.
In support of the NSCN (IM), the then PDA managed to convince the Union Home Ministry to shift the Governor and Interlocutor RN Ravi from Nagaland to Tamil Nadu. Perhaps for two reasons the then PDA ministry had the passion to remove the Interlocutor. Firstly, to thwart the possible Naga political solution for which the former Interlocutor was found determined to bring it about on time. Secondly, Mr. RN Ravi knows too much about the ins and outs of how the State of Nagaland has been governed over the years. Whereas, Mr. Ravi could not be defiled at will since he is a man of integrity and principle and thus his presence was considered a threat to many crooked politicians and bureaucrats. Having removed RN Ravi, perhaps they thought that the kingpin for Naga political solution was successfully displaced and thus it paved the way for continuance of fishing out of troubled-water. And all those who merely want ceasefire and negotiation without solution had a sigh of relief that their target of sabotaging the Naga political solution was achieved.
Subsequently, it is reportedly learnt that certain responsible leader while addressing a student’s gathering stated that the Naga political solution is not possible during this contemporary period and it is now left to the younger generation to pursue. Whereas, I wonder what made this type of leaders to have U-turn suddenly by propounding that procrastinating the Naga political solution will leave no future for Naga generations. Perhaps those who have been relentlessly working to let the prevailing situation in Nagaland remain as to their delight have smelt the signal of probable change of the yardstick which has possibly compelled them to sing the new song. As for an ordinary citizen like myself, what do I know is as to whether the BJP Govt. in Delhi will ever fulfill its promise made to the people of Nagaland that 2018 State election was for solution and yet the uncertainty looms large even after elapse of 4 years.
Whereas, quoting the press report on what is the contemplation of the Core Committee on Naga Political Issue as published in local papers dated 8.3.2022 “He (TR Zeliang, Chairman of UDA) said that CM Rio, Dy CM Y Patton and himself would meet Central leaders including Union Home Minister Amit Shah in Delhi on March 10 to discuss what best the Central Govt. could think for Naga solution. After hearing from the Centre, he (UDA Chairman) mentioned that they would come back and hold talks with the two negotiating groups so that they could sit across the table to discuss and agree to come together for a solution.” Unquote. The quotation implies as though these three leaders in particular or the Core Committee of UDA has been appointed by the GoI to act as the official Interlocutors between the GoI and the Naga negotiators. Secondly, it implies as though the merit of such agreement between the negotiators depends on the necessary intervention of the Core Committee of UDA. Such philosophies are unrealistic, illusionary and misleading.
Adding to the above figmentation, the UDA Chairman in his interview to NE Live which was subsequently published in Nagaland Page dated 13.3.2022 sought from AK Mishra what “highest offer” can the GoI give to the Nagas at this juncture? Here, the question is as and when have the Naga publics gave the mandate to the Chairman of UDA to negotiate with the GoI as he is so particular about the contents of such an agreement? When have the Naga public decided to discard the Naga negotiators, namely, NSCN (IM) and WC, 7 NNPGs along with the Framework Agreement of 2015 and the Agreed Position of 2017 respectively? When has the political negotiation between the GoI and the Core Committee of UDA headed by Chairman of UDA started? What are the political agenda of UDA so placed before the GoI to which the GoI’s reciprocity is being sought by the UDA Chairman? In what capacity and with what authority the UDA Chairman has superimposed the Naga negotiators by undermining the legitimate public voice?
Whatever might be the nitpick and contentions were the issues in the negotiations, everything could be ironed out between the NSCN (IM)/the WC, 7NNPGs and the GoI. Had it not been so, the processes of political negotiations would not have been brought to the official closure on 31st October, 2019. To me the acceptable solution therefore can come solely out of the 31st October, 2019 benchmark. Obviously, the solution that evolves out of the October, 2019 closure, if at all it becomes a reality, will be binding on the three official negotiating parties, namely, the GoI, the NSCN (IM) and the WC, 7 NNPGs. Whereas, what kind of meritorious offer being asked by the UDA from GoI is totally outside the purview of the said benchmark which in anyway does not have any political credence. If at all, any agreement is made outside the purview of the 31st October, 2019 benchmark, in my believe, such will not be binding on the Naga negotiators. In fact, the language used is not meant for any facilitator, and since the negotiations were closed some 2 years ago, such question becomes irrelevant.
Once again quoting the controversial resolution adopted in the UDA Govt. sponsored meeting on 9.3.2022 “The Naga people are yearning for an early political solution. The negotiating parties should earnestly heed to this call and arrive at a political solution that is honorable, inclusive, transparent and acceptable to the people. The house further appeals to all sections to make renewed efforts towards unity and understanding in order to work towards one solution and one agreement.”
Understanding the implication of your “unity and understanding,” I am to reiterate that the Naga disunity is never ever considered to be neither a deterrent to GoI at any stage of negotiations all these years nor should it be viewed as a roadblock to political solution. Such language is therefore nothing less than self-imposed precondition which is uncalled for and that stands irrelevant. From 1997 till 2015, the NSCN(IM) had its exclusive negotiations for 18 years uninterruptedly. To make the Naga political negotiation inclusive, the GoI invited the WC, 7 NNPGs in 2017 to have parallel negotiations for the purpose of inclusive solution. Consequently, the two parallel negotiations had been successfully concluded at one go in October, 2019. Eventually when any agreement for the propose political solution is to be signed, I believe, the three parties, the GoI, the NSCN(IM) and the WC, NNPGs will sign for a single solution. In the event of one Naga negotiator refuses to be part of such agreement, the other Naga negotiator deciding to sign the agreement will do it so for all the Nagas. In other words, when the NWSCN (IM) and the WC, 7 NNPGs agreed to have the agreement, it will be for a single solution. If otherwise, when only one party signs that signatory will bring solution for all the Nagas. Therefore, the Nagas may not necessarily be apprehensive about the inclusiveness as the eventual solution will not exclude anyone who opts for peace.
Disrespecting and undermining this benchmark will dilute the political status of the Nagas. In fact, the undue indulgence of the non-negotiators in such process will relegate the Naga political status to a mere law and order problem of the State. When so, who gains?
