It is an honor for the Naga people that ‘A Journey of Common Hope’ has got global recognition with the Baptist World Alliance, comprising of six regional bodies and 120-member countries, resolving to support and strengthen the Naga Reconciliation process. The resolution on the Nagas was among three resolutions passed during the general council meeting of the Baptist World Alliance (BWA) held at Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, from July 4-9. For the Naga Reconciliation process and indeed for our people, to be selected by an international grouping of 120 member countries and acknowledging the Nagas aspiration for peace as a burning issue of the day, it is quite remarkable and noteworthy achievement. The 120 member country would be almost the size of the United Nations. This is quite a huge unexpected support and whether Nagas are worthy of this, is something for us to introspect and demands our own responsibility to fulfill.
The eyes and ears of the Baptist world in particular will be on how Nagas live up to the commitments we so often make in support for peace, reconciliation and unity. It is important for us to realize that the international community and our well wishers do not just expect us to make declarations and affirmations but they want to see meaningful actions (of repentance and forgiveness) and positive outcome (of healing and reconciliation) from the Covenant of Reconciliation and the Journey of Common Hope. For the Naga political groups in particular, they should realize that the support that is coming from the international community also carries with it the expectation for us to do our part in reconciling to one another and “to adopt non-violent methods in pursuit of their goals”.
As rightly pointed out by the FNR Convenor, Rev Dr Wati Aier “how Nagas translate this resolution will be of great importance”. In particular the Naga political groups should consider this as an opportunity to show to the world and those who support us that peace and reconciliation can be achieved more so when we profess the teaching of Christ. In fact according to the last point of the BWA resolution, the current Naga reconciliation process was to be showcased as an “example to Baptist brothers and sisters around the world who find themselves in conflict with one another.” This last point was apparently suggested by a Serbian delegate who wanted the Naga Reconciliation Process experience to be an example of conflict resolution. Whether Nagas can actually live up to this example is something of a challenge for all of us.
Off course the immediate task before the Naga people is on how to get the Naga reconciliation process back on track after the recent breakup of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland. The FNR for genuine reasons has been keeping quiet and observing the developments. However sooner or later it will have to take some form of initiative—so that normalcy can be restored. Obviously, following the mishap and dent in the reconciliation process, repairing it and restarting the Journey of Common Hope, besides getting everyone on board is the immediate task. It will require something in the nature of quiet back channel diplomacy. At this juncture it would make sense for the FNR to rope in or at least meet and discuss with the two tribal hohos that matter—the Konyak Union and the Sumi Hoho—to explore ways and means out of this very difficult situation. Concurrently, the FNR should start working on the modalities to revamp the Covenant of Reconciliation given the changes taking place on the ground. It also needs to do more in formulating a design towards reconciliation, which touches the important aspect of repentance and forgiveness while at the same time creating a political mechanism or a blue print for building (new) relationships and allowing the space for cooperation to take place jointly, by way of evolving a common agenda for a shared future.
The eyes and ears of the Baptist world in particular will be on how Nagas live up to the commitments we so often make in support for peace, reconciliation and unity. It is important for us to realize that the international community and our well wishers do not just expect us to make declarations and affirmations but they want to see meaningful actions (of repentance and forgiveness) and positive outcome (of healing and reconciliation) from the Covenant of Reconciliation and the Journey of Common Hope. For the Naga political groups in particular, they should realize that the support that is coming from the international community also carries with it the expectation for us to do our part in reconciling to one another and “to adopt non-violent methods in pursuit of their goals”.
As rightly pointed out by the FNR Convenor, Rev Dr Wati Aier “how Nagas translate this resolution will be of great importance”. In particular the Naga political groups should consider this as an opportunity to show to the world and those who support us that peace and reconciliation can be achieved more so when we profess the teaching of Christ. In fact according to the last point of the BWA resolution, the current Naga reconciliation process was to be showcased as an “example to Baptist brothers and sisters around the world who find themselves in conflict with one another.” This last point was apparently suggested by a Serbian delegate who wanted the Naga Reconciliation Process experience to be an example of conflict resolution. Whether Nagas can actually live up to this example is something of a challenge for all of us.
Off course the immediate task before the Naga people is on how to get the Naga reconciliation process back on track after the recent breakup of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland. The FNR for genuine reasons has been keeping quiet and observing the developments. However sooner or later it will have to take some form of initiative—so that normalcy can be restored. Obviously, following the mishap and dent in the reconciliation process, repairing it and restarting the Journey of Common Hope, besides getting everyone on board is the immediate task. It will require something in the nature of quiet back channel diplomacy. At this juncture it would make sense for the FNR to rope in or at least meet and discuss with the two tribal hohos that matter—the Konyak Union and the Sumi Hoho—to explore ways and means out of this very difficult situation. Concurrently, the FNR should start working on the modalities to revamp the Covenant of Reconciliation given the changes taking place on the ground. It also needs to do more in formulating a design towards reconciliation, which touches the important aspect of repentance and forgiveness while at the same time creating a political mechanism or a blue print for building (new) relationships and allowing the space for cooperation to take place jointly, by way of evolving a common agenda for a shared future.
