Best Chance for Peace in Nagaland

Fresh round of talks between the Centre and the NSCN (IM) held on July 30 and August 1 and 3 in New Delhi, political consensus in the State which has seen 60 legislators willing to give up their seats, possible shift in hard line stance of the NSCN (IM) and effective negotiation stratagem by government interlocutors may just about tip the recalcitrant to join the mainstream. A brief survey of the post 1997 situation and portends ahead may be timely. 

 

Ironically while the CFA saw cessation of hostilities between security forces and NSCN (IM), Naga people failed to benefit from the “peace dividend”. NSCN (IM) and other factions of the ilk Khaplang and Khole Khitove known by their acronyms as NSCN (K) or NSCN (KK) for short have been accused of indulging in criminal terrorism to include illegal, ‘taxation,’ extortion and kidnapping. Factional fighting between groups for control over, ‘territory,’ related to, “tax domains,” has been rampant. 

 

More over these groups have spawned dangerous clones encroaching on peace in neighbouring Dimasa areas of Assam or Tirap district of Arunachal Pradesh. Naga groups have also been accused of being conduits for arms and munitions to other militant outfits in the region with links in China’s Yunnan province, Kachin state of Myanmar and Thailand.

 

The interim period of negotiations for a political solution for the past 15 years was used by these groups the largest of which is the NSCN (IM) for criminal activities using the shelter of designated camps and arms held under the terms of a CFA. The security forces were constrained by the CFA to act and Naga groups used the ploy of, “back to the jungle,” skillfully to prevent strong arm action.  All this could well change if the NSCN (IM) and the Government ink a final agreement. 

 

There is unusual political consensus in the State with members of the State Assembly camping in Delhi as talks between the Central Government  and NSCN (IM) continue. They are willing to sacrifice their seats and allow fresh elections with participation by militants, knowing that they could well lose in a fresh mandate. Naga civil society including the Church is fully supporting the process.

 

However there can be many a slip in the treacherous path of negotiations.  The former Home Minister Mr P Chidambaram just before relinquishing office on 31 July stated, “Let’s not go too fast. Let’s complete the first step. Then we will think about the next step.”  

 

In the talks reports indicate that land and decommissioning of weapons of over 15,000 Naga militants amongst other issues is under negotiation. The first challenge is reconciliation of minimalist positions of both the sides.  While NSCN (IM) has been harping on Greater Nagalim to include Naga areas in states of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh, the Government’s offer is likely to be limited to special constitutional status as that in Jammu and Kashmir with greater autonomy to the state to ensure protection of Naga identity.  The middle ground within this space may be hard to find unless one or the other side is willing to make a compromise.

 

While Delhi has made many attempts in the past for concessions by states with Naga enclaves there has been stiff resistance particularly from Manipur. Given resurgence of Meitei nationalism there is unlikely to be a shift in position. More over changing territorial status of Arunachal Pradesh will be a sticky point with China though that should not be the major consideration. 

 

Leaders as T Muivah, a Tangkhul whose abode is in Manipur are unlikely to relent easily for the very basis of their long struggle has been assimilation into Greater Nagalim. Mr Muivah has been trying to make inroads in this area for the past few years, but these have been effectively stymied by the Manipur government even though the Centre was quite amenable to provide political space to him.   So is Mr Muivah willing to accept the status quo and a diluted social rather than territorial Nagalim remains to be seen?

 

Unity in the Naga rebel space and willingness of other two NSCN factions, K and KK which have recently split is another factor. For peace with NSCN (IM) would not automatically imply that these groups will also seek a similar arrangement. Leaders of both groups have strongly expressed their reservations indicating that they would not accept a compromise between NSCN (IM) and Government. NSCN Khaplang continues to emphasise on sovereignty as the core issue even though it has gone and signed a peace agreement of sorts with the Myanmar government. The status of this group spanning India and Myanmar also creates a degree of ambiguity. The KK faction is emphasising the Naga Concordant a unifying document inked in 2011 by the groups.

 

Under the circumstances the option boils down to special status for Nagaland and a socio political coagulation of Naga communities across the North East.  What form will satisfy the NSCN (IM) leadership remains to be seen?

 

Notwithstanding these apprehensions there is a real chance of the NSCN (IM) joining the political mainstream which may lead other factions, Khaplang elements in India and the Khole Khitove to follow. Public opinion may be overbearing for these groups as moves of legislators from the State demonstrate. Hopefully for the Nagas the deal will be clinched soon and would include arrangements for preserving their unique identity within the larger Indian Union, for that has been the essence of their struggle for the past half a century.

 

Brig Rahul Bhonsle (Retd) is a Defence Analyst based in New Delhi

Views expressed are personal