The Fragile situation in ‘Nagalim’

The Fragile situation in ‘Nagalim’
Rajesh Verma*
Publication: the OtherSide, Vol. 21, No. 7, July 2008, (p.p. 32-34)

The Nagas were socially, politically and geographically isolated and did not enjoy a proper system of governance and administration till the 12th century. Ahom rulers brought the Naga inhabited areas under their jurisdiction. In the 19th century, these areas came under British control. Even during British rule, the Nagas remained socially isolated from the majority of India. They have had very few contacts with their neighbours as they were deliberately marginalized by the British. British strategy was to create a buffer territory between the plains of mainland India and the hilly regions of South-east Asia.

The Nagas were granted special status under the British. However, even prior to the independence of India, the Nagas sought greater political control and autonomy over their own affairs. Two World Wars and participation with British and Japanese forces generated a political consciousness and identity which the Nagas proved willing and capable of defending by military as much as by conventional political means.

Insurgency and Naga Movement

The British administrators of Nagaland who arrived at a truce with the Nagas towards the end of the nineteenth century agreed not to penetrate beyond certain boundaries, so their maps left numerous blank areas. When the Indian flag replaced the Union flag in August, 1947, it was promptly opposed by some Nagas, who had come to accept the British presence but did not want to join India. The Naga insurgency erupted on 14 August 1947,after a symbolic declaration of the independence of Nagaland on the eve of India's independence. For many years, the Naga National Council (NNC) under A.Z. Phizo fought a bitter war for Naga independence. However, the aggressive struggle mainly led by the Angamis did not meet with the approval of the other Naga tribes. "Soft-liners" among the Naga leaders, especially those belonging to the Ao tribes, which were not in favour of independence from India like P. Shilu Ao and Dr. Imkongliba Ao decided to start political negotiations with the Government of India in the early 1960s. The central government finally settled the issue by agreeing to the creation of Nagaland with P. Shilu Ao as its first Chief Minister. The Delhi Agreement signed on December 1, 1963 was nevertheless vehemently opposed by the NNC, but the Naga populace settled down to a routine political life.

The National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN) was formed in 1980, in protest against the 'Shillong Accord' of 1975 by the then Naga National Council (NNC) with the Union Government. The NSCN also stood for the unification of all contiguous areas inhabited by the Naga people. They demanded inclusion of four districts of Manipur (almost half of the state), Tirap and Changlang districts of Arunachal Pradesh and large areas of Dibrugarh, Sibsagar, Jorhat and Cachar districts of Assam in Greater Nagaland or 'Nagalim'.

Less than a decade later, in 1988, differences of opinion among its top leaders led to its dramatic split into two factions -the NSCN-K led by SS Khaplang, and the NSCN-IM led by Isak C Swu and Th. Muivah. Since then, the two NSCN groups have become bitter rivals, frequently targeting each other. Two decades down the line, in November 2007, a section of the NSCN-IM, comprising mostly members of the Serna tribe, split to form the NSCN-Unification, and quickly became a close ally of the NSCN-K, thus intensifying the problem. The reported emergence of yet another splinter group -the United Naga People's Council -has further compounded the situation. '

The NSCN (1M) has preferred to keep its arsenal despite the ongoing peace process. It appears that both Muivah and Swu are not respected as much now that people have become more familiar with their personalities, since they were closer to home from 2004. A younger generation of Naga ultras within Nagaland seems to have developed a counter force and is growing more and more independently from the old leaders. The younger generation benefited immensely from criminal activities organised in the region and has no interest in any peaceful resolution of the conflict.

If the NSCN (1M) leadership dilutes its stance on Nagalim, it runs the risk of being sidelined by the second-rung leadership. It is plausible that Muivah and Isak do not have much control over their cadres on the question of anything less than Nagalim and sovereignty. It is the demand for Greater N agaland which is keeping them together. A little softening of its approach on the part of the NSCN «1M) leaders would not match the expectations of the cadres. In fact, in a similar development after signing the Shillong Accord in 1975, the NNC leader Phizo accepted the Indian Constitution unconditionally on behalf of Nagas, only to find that he did not have the mandate to do so.

Factional Fights

Though both factions of the NSCN are under a cease-fire agreement with the Government of India, clashes between members of both groups have resulted in a deterioration of the situation. More than 500 people have lost lives in the conflicts between the NSCN (1M) and NSCN (K) in the last five years.

In November 2007, a section of NSCN (1M) cadres led by senior functionary Azheto Chophy left the group and formed NSCN-Unification Camp with cadres of NSCN (K). The new group has about 100-odd cadres. This group seeks to unite all Naga insurgent groups for the common cause. It views Muivah as an obstacle to the unification of Nagas. A new group calling itself the United Naga People's Council (UNPC) has also cropped up in the past few weeks and has threatened to 'rootouttheNSCN-IM'.

The recent clashes started from November 23rd last year when a section of Naga insurgents led by Azheto Chophy of the NSCN (1M) and C. Singson of the NSCN (K) signed a 'Joint Declaration', which claimed that the two warring factions are being united. Rival NSCN factions have killed nearly fifty people in and around Dimapur in the stepped-up violence in the past three months. Even the funeral proceedings were disrupted as rival NSCN groups took up fighting positions against each other. Thirteen NSCN- (Unification) rebels were killed in a gang war in Nagaland on May 16th, 2008, heightening tensions sparked by the stepped up factional feuds over the past month. A bloody internecine battle seems to be on between NSCN-IM and NSCN (U). The development has made Naga socio-political stability extremely precarious.

Cease-fire-1997 & Peace Talks

The 1997-Naga Ceasefire Agreement is not the first cease-fire. An earlier agreement on 6 September 1964 was terminated by the then Governor of Nagaland, B.K. Nehru, in 1972. Fighting resumed thereafter until the second ceasefire was made operational in 1997.

The ceasefire between the NSCN (I-M) and the Government of India has now entered its 11 th year. A peaceful settlement of the Naga problem has not been reached in these 11 years. It is expected that talks will continue until a settlement is arrived at. Nobody knows how long these will go on. The NSCN-IM's key rival, the NSCN-K, too, signed a truce with the government in 2001 but has not entered into peace talks yeLNow, there are two new factions to contend with.

Controversy over Cease-fire 'without any territorial limits'

In 2001, the Government of India announced that the cease-fire was valid "without any territorial limits", i.e. it was to be implemented outside Nagaland, in every Naga-dominated area (Manipur, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh). This abrupt decision sparked off waves of demonstrations in the Northeast, especially in Manipur (in the Meitei-dominated areas) on such a large scale that it had to be withdrawn within a few weeks.

The Nagas: Godfathers of the Northeast militancy?

The NSCN (1M) is one of the largest insurgent outfits in the entire region, gaining 'respect' among other ethnic insurrections and criminal outfits because of its huge criminal empire. Acting as the "Godfather" of many "terrorist" groups, it has trained and armed many groups in the region, such as the ULF A, NDFB, NLFT, KYKL and other smaller outfits. With Isak Swu as Chairman and Th. Muivah as General Secretary since 1988, the NSCN-IM boasted in 2005 of having 3,000 to 4,000 armed men (with at least one organised brigade and six well- structured battalions) who, even though they. have suspended their open hostilities against, the Indian Army since the 1997 cease-fire, have not given up their weapons and are still struggling against rival groups in the region like the NSCN-K, NSCN (U) or the ULFA. It has an annual budget of Rs. 200 -250 million and operates bank accounts in Thailand, Bangladesh and Myanmar. NSCN (1M) uses money earned from extortion and the narcotic trade to purchase weapons and to train its cadre. Besides having links with Pakistan's ISI, Bangladesh and China, it has contacts with the United Nations Human Rights Organization in Geneva, Unrepresented Nations People's Organization (UNPO) at The Hague and United Nations Working Group on Indigenous People (UNWGIP). NSCN (1M) also has a liaison office in China across the border with Arunachal Pradesh. The NSCN-IM has managed to build a strong parallel economy in the areas under its control and drug trafficking has become the prime source of funds for the group. It out sources activities like extortion, abduction, arms smuggling and robbery to various ultra outfits created by NSCN (1M) itself outside Nagaland.

The Naga insurgency is considered the longest and fiercest rebellion against the Central Government since India's independence. The violent tussle among the NSCN factions appear to indicate that the ceasefire agreements signed by the Union Government separately with the NSCN-IM and the NSCN-K are being violated at will. lhe situation in the six decade long movement is getting from bad to worse. With rare exceptions, most insurgent and civilian deaths have been the result of factional clashes. Under such circumstances, peace is unlikely to return to Nagaland any time soon. To resolve the issue, the government has to move beyond bilateral and secretive talks between Delhi and the two Naga leaders. A majority of Nagas support autonomy within the Indian union while a significant minority is seeking the creation of an independent Nagalim state. With the unification process on and the peace process between NSCN (1M) and the Central Government incl1ing towards a positive outcome, let us hope that Naga inhabited areas turn into an oasis of peace, factional fights come to an end and people are allowed to enjoy peace and prosperity in a democratic civic space.
*The author is a former Principal of Police School, Nagaland.