Complex evolution

For seven decades, the Naga political issue has remained a persistent shadow on the horizon, its resolution perpetually out of reach. While peace is the universal plea, the dialogue is muddled by a collective inability to dispassionately untangle the core political aspirations from the web of tribal, social, and political interests that have since become enmeshed. The primary obstacle is not the original political question itself, but the host of ancillary issues, driven by stakeholder perceptions, that now dominate the landscape. To cite instances, activities such as factionalism and the imposition of multiple “taxes” on the populace stand in stark opposition to the foundational ideals of Naga nationalism. The most acute symptom of this decay is the system of unabated and competing taxation levied by nearly 29 political groups. This has pushed public patience to its breaking point. In response, a groundswell of defiance has emerged from villages and urban colonies, issuing declarations to deny any tax demands. Their common refrain, “one government, one tax,” is a conditional offer of compliance, predicated on the unification of all factions. This catchphrase, however popular, represents a near-impossibility. The original Naga National Council (NNC) has seen decades of fragmentation, with splits leading to more splits. To expect these disparate groups, which have failed to unite despite years of appeals, to suddenly form a monolithic entity is to believe in finding a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Ironically, while factions remain divided, a veneer of unity has been manufactured in the state’s political arena. The legislators’ “unity” has historically been symbolic, failing to translate into tangible progress on core public grievances and risking the erosion of democratic opposition and accountability. Elected members have dissolved party lines to form an opposition-less government, justifying the move as a necessary step to present a united front for resolving the political issue. This performance of “oneness” is not new. The Nagaland Legislative Assembly has a long history of passing unanimous resolutions, dating back to 1964, and forming bodies like the Joint Legislators’ Forum (JLF) in 2009. The public resolution of ‘One government, One tax’ is as real the 1951 plebiscite and perhaps as relevant because it has come with a spontaneity unknown in the past. The demand for “one government, one tax” reflects a clear public consensus against extortion and a desire for a simplified, legitimate system. The unity among legislators, in theory, presents a stronger, singular voice from the state government when negotiating with the Centre. On the flip side, the public’s condition for paying tax-complete factional unity-is unrealistic and provides a perpetual stalemate. The ultimate failure of the present political parties in the state, is their glaring disconnect from the people they seek to represent. After decades of resolutions, the formation and reformation of legislative committees, and now the creation of a “Core Committee on Naga political issue,” the most pressing public concern-the crippling burden of multiple taxes imposed by multiple factions-remains conspicuously absent from their agenda. This deliberate omission reveals that the grand pursuit of a political solution has overshadowed the immediate governance required to alleviate the daily suffering of the people. “Worse, a growing divergence now makes all calls for unity inconclusive by design. As this paper noted two decades ago, the issue has been engineered to a point where ‘no solution’ is, in fact, the intended solution.