[Previous entry: "Peace in Nagalim British Houses of Parliament, London, 11 May 2006"] [Next entry: "Draft Resolutions – Parliamentarians for National Self Determination- PNSD 11th May 2006"]

05/13/2006: "SOME IMPORTANT POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE NAGA NATIONAL MOVEMENT Houses of Parliament, London, 11 May 2006"

Houses of Parliament, London, 11 May 2006
SOME IMPORTANT POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE NAGA NATIONAL MOVEMENT

Naga political history may be divided into three periods:

The early period: It may be called Golden era during which every Naga village, like the Greek city state, was sovereign and independent politically, economically, socially and culturally. They were also closely interrelated. The socio-political system of the Nagas was based on the democratic and socialistic culture.

The British period: The merit of this period is the spiritual and mental enlightenment. The demerit is division of the Nagas under their colonial policy of divide and rule placing them in different administrative units for political reasons, to which the Nagas had neither consented nor accepted.

The Indian period: This period is marked with social unrest, resistance movement, violation of human rights, fighting, bombardment of villages and killings in all Naga areas. Sanjoy Hazarika, a prominent writer broadly outlined three methods adopted by the Government of India in dealing with movements for self-determination like that of the Nagas. He writes, “Policies towards the Nagas and other pro-independent groups seem to revolve around three factors: brute force to crush the physical capacity to resist, a flood of funds to soften the resolve of indigenous groups and a fierce campaign to portray them as renegades and misguided elements.”

The Nagas are, by right, a nation composed of 47 recognized communities, who are living in a compact area. They are one racially, culturally, historically, politically and religiously. They have strong attachment to the land they belong. The Naga National Movement is based on their common political will, common culture, common history and geography.

Mr. Jaya Prakash Narayan (a member of the Peace Mission on the Indo-Naga conflict) stated, “The Naga people are unquestionably a nation.” Anthony Smith, an outstanding theoretician on ‘nationalism’ classified Nagas as a ‘nation’.

History says that Nagalim is not a part of India. The Nagas rejected the Union of India out rightly when the Indian Constituent Assembly invited them to join the Union. Mr. Balgovind Baboo said, “Historical and legal documents show that before the British rule, Nagaland (Naga areas) were in no way part of India”. Mahatma Gandhi, the father of Indian nation, affirmatively said, “Nagas have every right to be independent…”

The case of the Nagas is an invasion on their rights and territory by India. Nagas are the aggrieved party. It is neither a case of secession nor insurgency. We know the term ‘secession’ applies only to those who try to secede from the Union they have joined. Nagas are not a party to the Union of India. Therefore, the question of secession or insurgency does not arise in the case of the Nagas.

The Naga National Movement for independence is rooted in the solid ground of their national decision. All sections of Nagas from across the length and breadth of Nagalim, irrespective of tribes, gender, age and religious denominations are involved in the movement. The Nagaland peace mission declared, “The Naga struggle could not be regarded as a problem of law and order. It is a struggle for national freedom.” Recognizing the right of the Nagas, 24 Congressmen of the United States of America wrote a letter to Mr. William Jefferson Clinton, the then president of USA, on 20 October 1999: “We urge you to use your influence to help support self-determination for the people of Nagalim.” And in support of the ongoing Indo-Naga peace talks former US President Jimmy Carter wrote to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on 18th June 2005: "I am writing today to you and the NSCN leaders to express my appreciation to both parties for the initiative being taken towards a peaceful and lasting resolution."

In its fourth General Assembly held at The Hague, the UNPO recognized the sovereignty of the Naga people over their territory and the right to determine their future by themselves.

The claim that India inherited Nagalim from British India has no historical basis at all. A people are not commodities to be inherited by others. Land and culture are part and parcel of a people. Only a part of the Naga area was occupied by the British, whereas the rest remained as free as ever. Besides, the occupied Naga area was directly ruled by the British Crown. No laws passed by the British India were applicable to the Nagas, who governed their land by themselves according to their own customary laws. Moreover, there was no treaty between the British and the Nagas wherein the Nagas had ever surrendered their sovereignty. The Nagas even declared their independence on 14 Aug.1947, a day ahead of the Indian independence. But the most significant event in the Naga National Movement is the rejection of the Union of India and the plebiscite conducted by the Nagas where 99.9% voted in favor of a sovereign independent Nagalim. And that India has no authority or right to justify its illegal occupation of Nagalim.

Nagas are not terrorists. It is obvious that people who join the national independent movement are called freedom fighters. Ours is a resistance movement. We resorted to armed confrontation only in defense of our right, territory, culture, history, people and socio-political system. However, such fighting is confined only to combatants. Lt. Gen F.A Vyas of the Indian army said, “Naga insurgents never adopted terror tactics.” Mr. Murkot Ramuny, the notorious Indian Security Commissioner who created a reign of terror in Nagalim for many years, stated in his writing, “The Nagas do not kill civilians.” The Government of India has officially declared that NSCN is not a terrorist organization.

Finally, the Government of India and the NSCN are engaged in political talks. But there has been no tangible result even after eight long years. It shows their lack of political will to resolve for a lasting solution. The Government of India, through its agents, is selling the idea of peace and development without justice and freedom. They are also propagating for non-territorial solution, which is an attempt to retain the status quo of states under the parameter of Indian constitution. This kind of approach from the Indian constitutional perspective is an imposition of the Indian will upon the Nagas which is not acceptable to the Nagas. Hence, in order to bring a lasting solution to the long-drawn Indo-Naga conflict, it calls for the attention of the international community.

1. Rh. Raising
2. Angnaikham Makunga