NSCN (IM) used Nagaland instead of Nagalim in ‘framework agreement’, says working committee of NNPG

Dimapur, Aug. 30 (EMN): The working committee of Naga National Political Groups (NNPG) has flagged up the issue of the usage of ‘Nagaland’ instead of ‘Nagalim’ to describe the NSCN (IM) in the ‘framework agreement’ (FA), the texts of which the latter had recently made public.

NSCN is an acronym, which is expanded for the NSCN (IM) as Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagalim; the rest of the Naga groups use Nagaland instead of Nagalim.

In a statement issued on Sunday, the working committee said that if the FA was signed under Nagalim, no response would have been necessary ‘due to the fact that the usage of Nagalim is confined to NSCN (IM) members alone and their interpretation would have been irrelevant’.

“To them ‘Nagaland’ denotes the present geographical area of the Indian state of Nagaland. They discarded Nagaland and coined ‘Nagalim’ in their political vocabulary to propagate a different narrative. However, suddenly on the eve of signing the FA in 2015, they found the beautiful, blissful God-given ‘Nagaland’ more profound and document worthy in place of the discomforting ‘Nagalim’.

“The leadership might simply justify and defend the use of ‘Nagaland’ in the FA citing ceasefire agreement or any excuse to defend the non-feasibility of ‘Nagalim’. The sweet name of our nation ‘Nagaland’ is a powerful name. No other name can replace ‘Nagaland’. It is inclusive of all Naga tribes and lands in Indian states and in Myanmar. It is wise to use ‘Nagaland’,” the statement read.

The committee also maintained that it is ‘important’ to review the FA. “The question is, about whose political conflict was the FA signed? Which leader or group has the audacity to sign on a document that states political conflict started around 1955-56? On this issue, NSCN (IM) leadership must seek a review with GoI on the text of FA.

“We hope the GoI will accept the fact that six decades is just a fraction of Indo-Naga political conflict and necessary correction be initiated on FA. A people’s political journey cannot be dismissed in such an abject manner. It clearly reflects lack of Naga people’s consultation and participation prior to signing of FA. After five years and much secrecy, it appeared in public domain only recently showing excluding greater part of Naga history and struggle. Although the FA has erased the golden years of Naga struggle, the Naga people must retrieve every page and chapter and GoI, as per ‘agreed position’ between GoI and WC, NNPG, must restore Naga identity by correcting Naga chronology of political conflict,” it stated.

‘Who is anti-Naga?’

According to the working committee, in the statement issued in the name of Hutovi Chishi, the convener of steering committee, NSCN (IM) on August 18, there was a ‘clear threat perception against the rest of Naga groups, all tribes and sub tribes in Nagaland and affiliated organisations, NGBF and entire village chiefs’.

“It was the NSCN (IM) who fell in line first with RN Ravi when they signed FA on August 3, 2015 without consulting the Naga tribes. The Naga people, the Naga tribes have every reason to label NSCN (IM) as anti Naga for misleading the Nagas for twenty-three years. The Naga tribes have given up hope on NSCN (IM) leadership to bring home a solution and therefore the tribal leaders and village headmen, in one voice, with WC, NNPG as people’s mandated representatives, are demanding GoI interlocutor Mr. RN Ravi to announce honourable and acceptable solution to the Indo-Naga talks.

“Which leader, then, has the authority to declare an individual or an organisation anti-Naga? The group desirous of an enduring peaceful co-existence or the group which is working very hard to sabotage and prolong the issue at any cost?” it questioned.

Shared sovereignty

The committee stated that India is a federal state with each state sharing sovereign powers in the form of central list, state list and concurrent list. The states are given space to exercise sovereign powers sourced from the Constitution, it added.

“In a nutshell, this is shared sovereignty. If there is anything more the GoI has agreed on, NSCN (IM) must declare to the Naga people. As per the contents of the FA, the talks had concluded by 2015, yet, the NSCN (IM) has not shared any written document nor held proper consultation with the stakeholders, i.e the Naga tribes on so many intricate matters that are going to affect each Naga individual and tribe every day.

“The secrecy will have to be revealed and Naga people will take the call on the idea of shared sovereignty, whether it will serve the purpose of all Nagas or few. On the other hand, the WC, NNPG had invited and consulted Naga stakeholders at all levels from the day one. Neighbouring communities have been made aware as well. Every word in the ‘agreed position’ signed on November 17, 2017 was meticulously chosen and inserted in the historic document in order to entrench the vision and aspiration of the pioneering Naga nationalists,” it stated.