NNC/FGN has strongly condemned the central government’s move to further fragment Naga community and undermine Naga political aspirations by annulling the Free Movement Regime (FMR) and fence the Indo-Myanmar border.
Reiterating that Naga people would continue to preserve and uphold the integrity and sovereignty of their ancestral lands, NNC/FGN kedahge S Singnya and kilo kilonser P Puthai Lam in a press release declared the future of Nagas, characterised by a constant pursuit of self-determination, could not be dictated by external forces or diplomatic interventions.
They said their commitment to historical autonomy remained resolute, and would resist any imposition that sought to subvert the Nagas’ indelible right to live as a nation. Stating that the central government’s move to annul the FMR and fence the Indo-Myanmar border had raised serious concern over their broader implications, they alleged that the strategy perpetuated the legacy of colonial-era cartographic endeavours, reflecting a deeper issue in how territorial boundaries were conceptualised and implemented.
Historically, they claimed the creation of maps/borders was influenced by the colonial British administration, which often resulted in vague and imprecise delineation of territories.
They said the construction of border fencing transcended establishment of physical barriers, threatening to create divisions that extended into the social, economic, and cultural domains.
Ostensibly meant to enhance security, they cautioned that discarding FMR and erecting fence would disrupt long-standing communal ties, impede economic interactions, and restrict the free movement of Naga people, ultimately fostering a climate of disillusionment and resentment.
They said such an act/policy to fence the border would further aggravate the Indo-Naga political conflict and hamper the ongoing Naga peace process.
For the Nagas, they pointed out that land represented an inherent birthright, and steadfast commitment to safeguarding ancestral territories remained unwavering, regardless of the implications posed by the border fence, which risked exacerbating existing tensions that could easily turn the border red.