Sentimentalism Ownership Over Independence Day

The Naga issue is known by most people, and the conflict regarding the issue of freedom, the idea of Naganess and Indianess become visible during the Independence Day celebration on August 14 and the 15th. Could a person be entitled to celebrate two independence days as their own? Nagas do celebrate the 14th August as their independence and also celebrate 15th August, the Independence day of India. The former consist of the majority who celebrate in spirit and the other sections consist of various camps of the revolutionary factions but the wishes are the same that one day this historical day will come true; on the other hand, the later consist of the government employees, as politicians down to the peons celebrate the 15th August as part of the imposed responsibilities to save their jobs, otherwise their jobs, position and status will be in danger. But within this conditional believes of celebration, the owning of the date is a factor which Nagas have failed and will bound to fail in the coming days. Neither 14th August nor 15th August is just a date; it is a date deeply imprinted in the mind and spirit of the people connected by history of different period. So, in all robust consciousness, one person cannot ‘polygamize’ the different dates as their own, which the law of the land would not permit nor morality does allow or else it would be hypocrisy of the existential law and constitution of an established entity.

For most Nagas, 15 August is just another National holiday; they spend the day watching the celebration programmes. But are Nagas able to own 15 August as they own 14 August?

Why it is difficult or impossible for the Nagas to own the 15 August celebration of Indian Independence? It is because Nagas never part of the Indian struggle for Independence; they didn’t sacrifice their lives for it, and therefore, they could not relate to the sacrifice of Mangal Pandey, Azad, Bhagat or Bose; as someone who had sacrificed for their freedom, and therefore both India and Nagas should put an ardent effort to understand the historical context of the sentimentalism of the people.

This part of territory known by the name of Naga hills during those days was an excluded area, no string attached to these parts with India or from any other part exception of the kingdom of the Ahoms and occasional conflicts with Manipur in the bordering areas. It was only after the arrival of the British, the Anglo Burmese war and the signing of the treaty of Yandabo in 1826 that Naga hills and tribes came under the radar of the colonial observation.

Even after the colonial paramountacy in Naga territory, certain Naga areas continued to remain unadministered under the British rule, and therefore enjoyed their independence outside the area of the political control.

The Nagas were fighting for their nation, as during those days the tribal territories were considered as the nation of each tribe and thus their fight for independence dates back to even before the Indian freedom struggle. They were resisting the British from trespassing their territory that led to the battle of Kikruma in 1951; even before the Indian mutiny revolt of 1857 took place, which is popularly known as the first war of Indian Independence when the INC was formed in 1885 by Indians. The British on the other side had occupied the Naga areas of Samaguting and made its headquarters in 1886 and the Nagas, especially the Angami Nagas were preparing for a battle against the British government which eventually took place in 1889 and culminated in the seize of Kohima in 1881, establishing the permanent headquarters of British government in the Naga Hills.

The partition of Bengal and Swadeshi movement started in Bengal in 1905; on the other side, the British penetrated into the interior areas of Nagas, annexing the territories of the Sangtam and the Sumis.

When Indians were resisting the partition of Bengal and was revoked in 1911, the Konyak Nagas were resisting the British annexation.

Back in 1820s Jadonang and Gaidinliu movement or Heraka movement was primarily to revive and preserve the indigenous religious practices from the influence of Christianity and thus resisted the British conversion of Nagas to Christianity, but this has nothing to do with the Nagas in the Indian freedom struggle.

When the Indian national movement was under the radar of Gandhiji and initiated the satyagraha movement post 1917, the British were recruiting Nagas to fight for them in the first world war.

When the Indians were deeply mourning due to the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in 1919 and swept by the wave of non co-operation movements in 1920s, the Nagas were already structuring the roadmap for its political movement by forming clubs and tribal councils.

When the members of the Simon Commission came to India, Indians boycotted the commission with black flags. Nagas on the other hand, submitted a memorandum to the commission in 1929, mentioning that the future of the Nagas be left to themselves for determining their own future.

When the round table conferences and the civil disobedience movement started in 1930, the Nagas forwarded the memorandum to her majesty government for their political future.

When the Quit India movement began in 1945, Nagas were fighting on two fronts- one alongside the British against the Japanese invasion and other alongside the INA alliance of Japan and Germany, but this were not struggle for the Indian independence but for the Nagas. They joined the former with a vision that the British would honour the Naga’s contribution by ginving freedom after the way, and the later with the objective of driving out the British from the land of Nagas.

The participation of A.Z Phizo as a colonel under Subhas Chandra Bose, Indian National Army, was a good example. His main intention was to liberate the Nagas from the British yoke with the help of the INA as Bose took the support of Germany and Japan to liberate India; the military alliance was unfortunately defeated in the Battle of Kohima, which resulted in Phizo being imprisoned at Rangoon after the British found out that he was involved in the war against them by supporting the INA, but it was not a struggle for Indian independence but for the Nagas.

All these events have a cold connection between the India’s struggle for freedom and the Nagas. There was disassociation, connection and participation of the two sides for and with different reasons, but both were striving for their own freedom and independence.

To celebrate something so passionately and deeply, a person must have an attachment to the memories of the past struggle, sufferings and loss. So, when the moment of liberation comes, one should relate to the days of sufferings, and this moment of realization would enable a person to truly embrace the value and essences of freedom, alleviating oneself to experience the greater solace and peace of minds, the feeling of belongingness to people and deeper connection to the land, the motherland.

When Indians in broader sense see the flag, they were able to envision and relate their attachment to those past memories that makes them so natural to endear the flag and makes the date valuable. More to it, how proudly would they be able to narrate those great freedom fighters who had sacrificed their lives; in other words, they have ownership over those events, struggles, martyrs or stories, but on the other hand, Nagas have nothing to depict the heroism of those (freedom fighters) and say that they have martyred for the Nagas. Neither the national anthem has any acceptance of the Nagas, nor Vande Mataram, Bharat Mata or Jai Hind. The Nagas have no connection with the Indian civilization. While on the hand, when Nagas hold the Naga flag, the struggle and sufferings the people went through in the hands of Indian army are flashed back, and thus they are able to embrace the 14 August and the Naga flag more deeply as it is attached to the struggle of the people who suffered atrocities in the hands of the people who imposed upon them to accept the dates that the Nagas have done nothing to be celebrated as sacred auspicious. How could that be possible when people do not have the ownership of the day and a reason to be celebrated?

History will one day question the contribution of the Nagas to the Indian struggle for freedom; what will be the answer of the Nagas and India? Therefore, even after knowing all these well, if India wishes to thrust the stone on the neck of the Nagas and fit the people into the mainstream, it must give the ownership of the day from the beginning, regardless of the participation of Nagas in the Indian national freedom struggle, so that the future generations do not struggle to find an answer when asked about their ancestors’ participation and contribution towards owing the dates — 15 August or 26 January — as their own.

However this question still remains: Would Nagas ever be able to have sentimentalism ownership over the 15th August?

Hokato Awomi

Activist and Assistant professor.