Naga Peace talks raise hopes

Renewing its effort with a fresh approach to make some progress, the Government of India (GOI) has held a fresh round of talks with the National Social Council of Nagaland/Nagalim’s Isaac-Muivah group (NSCN-IM) in the first week of March 2010 in New Delhi – the first since RS Pandey took over as the newly appointed interlocutor, following Kantipudi Padmanabhiah, who held the post for ten years before demitting office a couple of years back.

The Naga group’s five-member delegation headed by Thuingaleng Muivah submitted a list of 30 demands, which include sovereignty for Nagaland and unification of all Naga-dominated areas of neighbouring north-eastern states (in 2001, the NSCN-IM leaders’ insistence on the concept of Nagalim or Greater Nagaland – which includes areas of other neighbouring states, where Nagas at some point of time settled – led to much violence in Manipur, one of the states that would be majorly affected by the Greater Nagaland demand; protests also emanatied from Assam and Arunachal Pradesh and tribal communities, including the Kukis, Dimasas and some others).

The proceedings began with a 40-minute meeting of the delegation with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, followed by a 75-minute session with Union Home Minister P Chidambaram, accompanied by Home Secretary GK Pillai and Special Secretary (Internal Security) UK Bansal, which Muivah summed up as “a comprehensive discussion and the NSCN (IM) will continue the negotiation with the Government of India”.

Speaking to this writer, RS Pandey expressed satisfaction at the talks being held after over a year of uncertainty, at the positive signs of the delegation visiting the Prime Minister, Home Minister and the commitment and hope of both sides about further forward movement towards an “honourable negotioated settlement”. He further added that henceforth talks would be held formally, or even, informally.

To go back a little into history, on 14 August 1947, the Nagas under their leader, Angami Zapu Phizo, declared Independence under the banner of the Naga National Council (renamed Federal Government of Nagaland in 1959), taking the stand that they did not belong to India. Phizo escaped to erstwhile East Pakistan in December 1956, from where the Pakistan government arranged for his passport and journey to London, UK.

In 1988, a violent clash between the NSCN’s two dominant groups – Tangkhuls, hailing largely from Manipur’s Ukhrul and Senapati districts under Thuingleng Muivah and Issac Chisi Swu and Konyaks hailing from Myanmar’s hill tracts under SS Khaplang – resulted in an acrimonious split, followed by both groups continuing wanton violence and extortion in Nagaland and Manipur.

50 years after Independence, the ceasefire signed on 1 August 1997 greatly reduced the violence but extortion continued, along with some other violations.
In 1993, in the first hints of a thaw, in the first ever interview of Muivah by the North East Sun magazine, he said: “…..if Nagas come to the negotiating table the failure will not be on the Nagas’ part.”

Finally, on 24 January, 2003, Swu and Muivah, and Padmanabhaiah arrived at the Samrat Hotel, New Delhi, after meeting the then National Security Adviser, Brajesh Mishra following three hectic days of talks, to issue a joint statement to a large gathering of media. After the pandemonium subsided, the two Naga leaders spoke. “…we are happy, …so far the talks have gone off well, …a wide range of substantial issues have been covered …but have not touched all issues…..”

On being asked by this writer if they were prepared to lay down arms, both Issac and Muivah got into a tizzy and the latter replied, “…the question does not arise…,” but on further querying by other media- persons, the Naga leaders stated that this would be discussed at a later stage. They expressed that they were happy about meeting the then Prime Minister, Home, Defence and Finance Ministers and said that the negotiations would “continue till a lasting settlement”.

After the Delhi visit, in an interview published in The Assam Tribune on 26 May 2003, Muivah declared that the Nagas would never lay down three things – arms, freedom and territories. “Let there be no illusion whatsoever, we have made it clear. So long as Indian armed forces are in Nagaland, we need to have arms.”

NSCN-K Chairman SS Khaplang in a meeting of its leaders on 3 February 2003 said that peace talks between the GOI and NSCN (IM) would not be able to make headway without unity amongst the Naga tribes and factions, that resolving the Naga problem could mean an end to almost half of the North East’s insurgency, as most of the insurgent groups have their bases in NSCN-K dominated areas. He added that while NSCN-K would not on its own try to be a party to the ongoing talks because it would be blamed if the talks fail. However, they would respond if invited.

The past decade has witnessed a significant process of change in Naga society. Naga youth are converging to metropolitan cities for further studies and employment. They are generally appreciated by employers for knowledge of English and their work ethic.

Nagas serving in the Army and para-military forces, particularly in Jammu & Kashmir (including Kargil) and other conflict zones, are admired by their colleagues and feared by the enemy or adversary for their outstanding bravery.

Since 2005, Naga society, particularly the youth, have begun to drive home the message that the NSCN and associated groups should stop violence. The youth have gone beyond protests and have been physically driving the NSCN out of villages.

Not oblivious to these changes, factions of NSCN and the Naga Federal Government (NFG) have reportedly come much closer.
 
This round of talks is in a way unprecedented in raising hopes. Mr. Pandey is understood to have explained the concept of shared sovereignty which the Indian Constitution provides for unique cases. Under this provision, the government is prepared to accommodate certain subjects in the Union List – 1, in exclusive domain of the Centre – and Concurrent List – 3, in domain of both the Centre and the State – to be transferred to the State List- 2, in exclusive domain of the State.

The Naga leaders are also understood to have proposed that the “competencies to be exercised by Government of India and the Nagas have to be clearly identified”

 If the contentious issues can be dropped by Nagas, this arrangement may actually provide greater autonomy to Nagaland in recognition of the Naga’s uniqueness.

(Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the views either of the Editorial Committee or the Centre for Land Warfare Studies).