The Hindu : The Naga peace process

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Monday, Jan 13, 2003

Opinion

Opinion - Editorials

The Naga peace process

THE MEETING BETWEEN the top leaders of the NSCN (I-M) and the Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, in Delhi suggests that a solution to the problem involving the Nagas is imminent. The NSCN (I-M), after all, was among the outfits banned for their activities considered inimical to the unity and territorial integrity of India and its top leaders — Isaac Swu and Thuinggaleng Muivah — were forced into exile for several years. The ban on their activities had prevented the Union Government from holding talks with the outfit within the country due to which the Government's special emissary, K. Padmanabhaiah, had to fly to Thailand several times since 1996 even to set the stage for formal talks. Mr. Swu and Mr. Muivah, it may be recalled, were holed up in Thailand all these years to evade arrest and there was an element of incongruity in the manner in which the negotiations were being carried out; the Union Government was engaged in talking to the leaders of an outfit that was banned by law. The ban, which was time bound, had lapsed a couple of months ago and when the Home Ministry did not extend it further, it was clear that the stage was set for direct and formal talks with the NSCN (I-M).

The extension of the areas of ceasefire between the Government troops and the NSCN (I-M) cadre to parts of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh at one stage, which was agreed upon during one such round of talks, however, provoked large-scale violence across Manipur. It is a fact that the idea of including the several districts outside Nagaland within the scope of the ceasefire agreement was indeed based on a demand by the NSCN (I-M). It was clear even then that Mr. Swu and Mr. Muivah placed the demand in the larger context of their demand for ``greater Nagaland''. That the NSCN (I-M)'s demand and its agenda go beyond mere territorial adjustments and that the Council continues to remain firm on its demand for secession of the Naga dominated region (that includes several districts in Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh) from the Indian Union are clear from the words that the two leaders have chosen to describe the nature of the talks even now. Take for instance the refrain by the two leaders soon after the talks that they perceived a change in the Government's position in that "there is a better understanding now'' and that the Government was willing to understand the unique history and circumstances of Nagaland. Similarly, Mr. Swu has refused to categorically distance the NSCN (I-M) from the demand for "greater Nagaland". All these and similar remarks by the two leaders during their interaction with the media after the talks with the Union Home Minister, L. K. Advani (that their demand remains the same), will certainly remain the basis for serious apprehensions over the direction of the talks whether it be among the people of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh where the idea of a "greater Nagaland'' could mean ceding of territory or the level of unity and territorial integrity of the Indian state. The NSCN (I-M) has refused, even at this stage, to give up its demand for a separate nation.

For all these reasons, it becomes imperative for the Vajpayee regime at this stage to state in categorical terms that the NSCN (I-M) should give up its demand for "greater Nagaland'' once and for all. It is also important that the Union Government put in place an institutional arrangement to involve the political leadership across the spectrum in the negotiations. Such an approach is all the more important given the conflict of interests in the northeastern region where the party system and political labels have remained irrelevant and where internecine wars between outfits consisting of tribal youth have led to the collapse of the party system completely. An immediate fallout of the Naga peace talks, as it is evident now, is the unrest simmering among the Khuki youth in Manipur who fear that the talks could lead to disintegration of the State. Given fears and apprehensions the onus is now on the Prime Minister to not just assuage the feelings but also clarify the framework within which the Naga peace process will be pursued from now.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

The Naga peace process

Trial and tribulations

Setback to SAARC

A strategic mis-step?

Neighbourhood policy: the Yashwant Doctrine?

Mixing of cultures a dynamic force