Dr Asangba Tzudir
On 11th June 2021 the Nagaland Government notified that a Parliamentary Committee comprising all the 60 members of the Nagaland State Legislative Assembly was formed to discuss matters relating to the Naga Political Issue stating that the Committee will play the role of facilitator in the ongoing talks between the GoI and the Naga Political Groups.
Going back to the 1997 Ceasefire Agreement signed between the GoI and the NSCN (IM), it was agreed that the talks would be unconditional, which also means that neither side should stick to their traditional position. Since then a lot of developments have taken place in the Indo-Naga peace process.
Now, in response to the formation of the Parliamentary Committee, the NSCN (IM) while welcoming the Committee stated a condition that it “does not attempt to dilute the spirit and substance of the Framework Agreement as the final basis for Naga Political Solution.” It also comes with a caution that no such Committee is expected to bear fruit if historical realities are not taken into account.
So, within this new development, the whole focus shifts to the role of the Parliamentary Committee as a facilitator. The ‘job’ of a facilitator is to make an action or process easier, and generally, in conflict management resolution, the facilitator impacts and guides the process but does not give input on the content of the discussion or of the conflict issue at hand nor can it act as a mediator to make the negotiators come to an agreement.
For now the word ‘facilitator’ seems to be used in an unclear context and thus the Parliamentary Committee first needs to clearly define what it means when they say that they are to play the role of a facilitator. In the context of the situation, the word facilitator has both technical as well as political connotation. Firstly, mapping the concept within is technical ambit is necessary to ensure that there is clarity of its technical operation, and that there is no conceptual trespassing. Secondly, the political connotation itself makes facilitating more challenging, that making the process simpler becomes difficult because of the very nature of the political trajectories that has happened over the years.
And within this, there have been issues of trust deficit at various levels making the political connotation more pronounced. The trust deficit will also limit the role of facilitating irrespective of what form or content it takes.
But, the pursuit of a solution to the protracted Naga political issue cannot be dragged on any further. At this point in history and the times over the decades it has witnessed, the Naga aspirations needs to be re-ignited with a clear conscience. To this end, Naga Civil societies should continue to play a proactive role in erasing the trust deficit towards bringing all sections of Naga society together. This may pave the way for making the ‘process of negotiation easier’, so also bringing an honorable and sustainable solution that the generation of tomorrow will live a life of dignity.
(Dr Asangba Tzudir writes a weekly guest editorial for The Morung Express. Comments can be mailed to asangtz@gmail.com)
