Neokpao-led Working Committee (W/C) of the Naga National Political Groups (NNPG) has criticized the recent letter by 21 opposition MPs to Union Home Minister Amit Shah regarding the Indo-Naga political issue, stating that misinterpretations of the peace process have further complicated the situation rather than facilitating a resolution.
W/C emphasized that since the 1964 Indo-Naga ceasefire and the failure of the “six-round” talks at the Prime Minister’s level, Nagas have struggled to achieve political unanimity due to factionalism and internal conflicts.
Stressing the importance of political consensus, crucial to find an enduring and inclusive political solution, W/C asserted that it has engaged in interactive consultations with Naga stakeholders and, with their endorsement, entered into political dialogue with the Government of India (GoI).
In the process, WC said a detailed political roadmap was prepared to ensure an honorable, enduring, and inclusive solution based on the “historical and political rights” of the Nagas while considering contemporary political realities.
WC said that the successful conclusion of formal talks between the Centre and Naga negotiating groups as declared on October 31, 2019, was a testament to the commitment for an early solution.
W/C stated that the letter from the 21 MPs in itself was a clear indication that “Framework Agreement” (FA) and the contemplated political solution was indeed within the confines of the Indian Union. The same was also briefed to the Indian Parliament’s “select committee” and the Nagaland Legislative Assembly by then-Interlocutor R.N. Ravi.
W/C expressed confidence that the MPs, as patriotic representatives, were well acquainted with the contours of FA and would not in all sanity blindly vouch for any such agreement that threatens the national integrity of the Indian union, sovereignty of India under any circumstances and would remain true and loyal to their oath to uphold the Constitution of India.
While acknowledging the MPs’ support for an early resolution, W/C cautioned against unnecessary hype or assume the move as legitimization of FA over the Agreed Position (AP). It noted that both agreements— FA and AP—were signed with the same interlocutor under the same government and the same Prime Minister over the same political issue.
While AP remains transparent in public domain, W/C noted that it was signed with prior consultations and endorsement of all stakeholders and Nagas at large. Whereas, WC said FA belonged exclusively to a particular group—NSCN (I-M), adding that the negotiation process remained isolated, opaque and accessible to only few selected leaders of NSCN (I-M) and remains shrouded in secrecy.
W/C asserted that no Naga stakeholder was privy to the FA’s contents in the form of the so-called “competencies.” It said that the FA neither commands the endorsement of the Nagas nor does it represent the popular will of the Nagas, asserting that it shall always remain a “mysterious document” to be hailed by IM protagonist.
W/C, therefore, urged the Global Naga Forum (GNF) to enlighten the Nagas on the finer details of the FA and justify why Naga people’s endorsed AP signed between W/C, NNPG and Government of India, should be considered a counter-agreement to FA.
Calling GNF as the propped-up mouth pieces of NSCN (I-M), WC asked GNF to sincerely interpret the concept of “shared sovereignty, contemporary realities and co-existence,” as committed by IM in the FA, and how these terms delineates “Sovereignty and Independence” of the Nagas.
W/C accused the GNF of selective amnesia, asserting that its actions were fuelling more division within the Naga Political Groups, rather than providing support and momentum towards realization of an inclusive Naga solution, being propagated by WC/NNPG through AP and the Status Paper.
W/C has asked on GNF to clarify on its status and position, whether it was merely an appendage of IM, as was obvious by its persistent acts of glorifying IM or truly represents the global Naga community.
W/C also reminded GNF that FA was exclusively “for the IM, by the IM and the IM” and does in no manner ensure or reflect inclusive political solution encompassing all Naga stakeholders.
Therefore, to remedy this political blunder, W/C said Government of India and the Naga people identified the need to initiate a broad-based, comprehensive and holistic political agreement that can ensure honorable, enduring and inclusive political solution.
This led to formation of W/C, NNPG with political clarity and signing of the ‘Agreed Position’, providing a transparent and exhaustive political dialogue fully endorsed by Naga people, it said.
W/C said that based on the “historical and political rights of the Nagas” and the rights of the Nagas to self-determine its own future, it said W/C and Centre collaboratively brought out the ‘Status Paper,’ outlining a pragmatic blueprint for an inclusive political settlement, by having agree to in principle by both the entity (WC and GoI).
And to guarantee inclusivity, WC said the implementation scheme was to be worked out immediately by taking all the Naga negotiating groups on board.
However, to utter dismay of the Nagas, W/C accused NSCN-IM, that instead of moving forward with the “execution plan,” retracted from its October 31, 2019, declaration.
W/C alleged that the NSCN (I-M), in order “to evade responding to public probing of the secret contents of FA (if it exists) began manufacturing propagandas in total contradiction to its own FA commitment.”
This, W/C argued, that the only obstacle to Naga political solution was NSCN (I-M)’s exclusive complexity and its sponsored puppet organizations blindly joining the chorus