[Previous entry: "This is in response to an article written by Mr. Y.Wangtin, Deputy Kilonser (Khaplang Group), under the caption “Open letter to NNC Leader”, who is a frequent writer trying to mislead the Naga’s and defaming our leaders image, through his malicious writing being feted by the RAW’s of the India, is highly questionable and unwanted."] [Next entry: "Nagas reduce to minority in own land’ The Morung Express"]

08/09/2007: "NSCN (IM) says rival’s ‘panic understandable’ The Morung Expres"

NSCN (IM) says rival’s ‘panic understandable’ The Morung Expres
Dimapur, August 8 (MExN): It is “quite understandable” why the NSCN-K is getting restless “if not panic under the new sort of arrangement in the ceasefire declaration” the NSCN-IM says. According to an NSCN-IM MIP response to NSCN-K Kilonser Wangtin Naga, the rival faction is a spent force and ‘now used as a counter-revolutionary force to create and speak nuisance against NSCN.’
“As seen around the world where resistance groups exist fighting to gain their political rights, fighting is a continuous process until they sit across the table for another round of fight. Unlike Khaplang group who remain satisfied with their designated assignment by India to cause road block to NSCN political movement, NSCN has been fighting the Indian occupational forces until the Indian government realized the futility of using military means to suppress and to end the Indo-Naga issue” the MIP stated.
The NSCN-IM explained that “ceasefire is all about the undeniable outcome of more than half a decade (of) fighting between Naga army and the Indian Army.” It also asserted that the world “at large” recognizes the Naga political “stance” of the ten-year ceasefire and the number of Indo-Naga political talks in search of a final solution.
While stating that frustration leads to ‘any thing,’ the MIP maintained that the NSCN-K has condemned Naga civil societies and international support groups for “standing solidly behind political fight with India.” It added that however, “taking across the political table was the least concern for India, because India is not that foolish not (sic) to realize the reality of Khaplang group whose political vision is a mere paper demonstration and nothing beyond that because in the absence of political mission what have they to present before the government of India.”
Centre for lasting peace in NagalandOur Correspondent Assam Tribune
SHILLONG, Aug 8 – The NSCN (IM) can walk out of the peace process if it feels that present initiative would not usher lasting peace in the militancy-hit State, said Union Minister and the peace negotiator with the outfit, Oscar Fernandes.

The Centre and the NSCN (IM) had entered into an “indefinite ceasefire” recently. Both the Centre and the outfit feels that it would bring in lasting peace through the process, he said.

Assam-Nagaland border flares up OUR BUREAU The Telegraph
Guwahati/Kohima, Aug. 8: Pre-emptive restraint from Assam was reciprocated with uncontrolled aggression from the Nagaland side today, triggering a second flare-up along their long-disputed boundary in just over a month.
The Jorhat district administration prevented a march by students towards the inter-state border in Mariani in anticipation of trouble, but could do little when a mob from the opposite side went about ransacking and setting houses ablaze on Assam’s territory a few hours later.
The incident occurred in Udaipur village near Nagajanka, under Mariani police station. Apart from targeting houses, the intruders fired at an Assam police team and manhandled workers of Bosajan tea estate.
The scale of violence would have been bigger had the police not intercepted the student activists marching towards the New Sunthia border outpost earlier in the day. “Had we allowed the procession of students to New Sunthia, armed people from Nagaland villages were ready for them,” deputy commissioner L.S. Sangson said.
Last month, Naga villagers raided three villages near Geleki in Sivasagar district, killed two residents and torched several houses. The incident provoked an economic blockade against Nagaland by the All Assam Students’ Union.
The president of the AASU’s Jorhat unit, Biren Saikia, said another economic blockade was inevitable if residents of the neighbouring state continued to attack villages on the Assam side.
Jorhat police intercepted AASU activists at the Psutaphala checkpoint on the Mariani-Mokokchung road, not far from the New Sunthia border outpost. People on the Nagaland side had, of course, made all preparations to take on the student activists.
The Mokokchung-based vice-president of the Ao Students’ Conference, L. Imti Jamir, said hundreds of Ao Nagas were still camping close to the border to repulse a possible attack from the Assam side. “We are fully prepared to march to the area to protect our land from the encroachers.”
The Naga student leader revealed that thousands of students were “on standby” to proceed to Longtho and Tzurangkong “if anything happens”.
The Ao Senden, the apex organisation of the Ao community, asked tribesmen to prepare for the worst.
Mokokchung deputy commissioner Abhishek Singh said he had been in touch with his Jorhat counterpart since learning of the AASU’s plan to march to the border. “We requested the Jorhat district administration to take necessary steps to stop the procession from proceeding towards New Sunthia.”
Sangson said the AASU precipitated the crisis by violating prohibitory orders.
But Nilofer Rahman, who led the procession, said it was unfortunate that “Assamese people cannot walk freely in their own land” and blamed the government for the lingering border dispute.
“Our government has failed to keep our border intact and is allowing other states to capture land,” Rahman said.
Chief secretary P.C. Sarma called up his Nagaland counterpart twice during the day and also spoke to officials in the Union home ministry about the dispute.
Assam maintains that its boundary extends to the New Chuntia border outpost but Nagaland police have set up a permanent camp 13 km inside its territory at New Sonowal. Naga villagers have allegedly encroached upon land even beyond that point.
NSCN reacts to Dr Shishak's article

The National Socialist Council of Nagalim (NSCN) feels overwhelmed by the unflinching support of our people during a decade of Indo-Naga peace process. Through the cease-fire and the peace process, the battlefield for Nagas is now shifted from the jungle into an open platform. Now, the voices of the Nagas can be heard in the Parliaments, Assemblies, public gatherings, on pulpits, in the streets, in the international conferences, in the media and everywhere.

At times, this paradigm shift has also become a fertile ground for Indian intelligence to exploit the situation. Taking undue advantage of the easy accessibility to reach out to the public through media and also on account of the total tolerance of the NSCN on freedom of speech and expression, dangerous and treacherous articles with malice to NSCN also find their way. It is very unfortunate that the Government of India (GoI), which inherited ‘divide and rule’ policy from the British colonialist, has experienced its effectiveness and therefore, has all along been using against the Nagas. Realizing the sensitivity of the Nagas on communal or tribal lines, they are playing this tune in full volume where undoubtedly there are a few Naga dancers too. But the million-dollar question is, “why should national issues be identified as that of communal or tribal and not as between the nationalists and the traitors”? Of course, devil will not leave any stone unturned to serve his diabolic purpose.

Going through the article under the caption, “A Confession” by Rev. Dr. Tuisem A Shishak, published all over the local papers, on 24th July 2007, the entire Naga nation is put in a state of shock while the adversaries rejoice over their melodious ‘surrogate voice’. Every sentence of this article is an attack against the Tangkhul community, the NSCN and on the Naga national struggle for self-determination. The self-proclaimed larger than life-size Tuisem naturally thought he could toy around with the Naga’s rights and get away with it, on account of his being a Reverend and a Church leader as well as being a high flying academician. Tuisem’s ‘Confession’ is aimed at revealing the inner condition of his heart and thereby induce others too, to openly come out to denounce NSCN and the Tangkhuls. How dare he communalize the Naga national issues and the movement? Are the 9 Point-Agreement of 1947, the 16 Point-Agreement of 1963, the Shillong Accord of 1975, the Military Coup of 1978, the Abortive Coup of Khaplang of 1988, on tribal lines and communal issues? In the Naga national political issue, it would have been wise for him to remain silent and leave a room for others to doubt his credibility than to open his unguarded mouth and be confirmed as a big fool.

When he said “…… I am convinced that many of the things spoken against the Tangkhuls in general, and Tangkhul I-Ms in particular, are valid and true”……… “Excesses committed by certain Tangkhuls in the NSCN (I-M) have for long angered other Nagas, not just the Khaplang group”, he was simply echoing the often quoted expression of the anti-nationals to create suspicion, doubt and differences within the rank and file of the NSCN on tribal line so that having weakened NSCN, GoI may take full advantage and press for a ‘dictated term of agreement’ in place of ‘an honorable solution’. To propagate this in a seemingly very harmless manner, Indian Intelligence wing has been penetrating and brainwashing a few selected ‘Indians of Naga origin’ such as he. And by his own admittance, he became a part of the Indian strategy.

How can Tuisem compare ‘the murder of Abel by his brother Cain’ to that of the defense of the God given rights of the Nagas from the aggressors? Is sacrificing everything for the Naga nation a crime that there has to be ‘pay day some day’ ? By this, doesn’t he mean that the Naga national struggle for self-determination is a crime where all the nationalists should stand before the judgment throne of his Godfather, India?

When he does not know even an iota of what is the life of a revolutionary patriot, why pretend to know all and make a fool of himself? Does he not know that, nobody in the NSCN is paid for the sacrifice they make? It is not a job to be paid in the first place. When he has a wrong basis, his conclusion can never be right. If he truly cares so much on the basic needs of the cadres, what has he contributed, may we ask? Or is it just a lip service? By what authority does he condemn the NSCN leaders on one side of amassing wealth through unfair means and on the other side, the lower-rung cadres as extortionists? As any Indian Intelligence would, he is trying hard to drive a wedge between the leaders and the cadres and to strike discord within the rank and file of the NSCN. This calls for a serious crime he is committing.

Why is he inciting communalism or tribalism? Is he not targeting a particular community when he said,……“So far I have not said anything good about the Tangkhuls. ……“There is another characteristic of my tribe: arrogance”. ……… “You can be sure, Tangkhuls are not united”. ………“Many Tangkhuls living and working in Nagaland State must have provoked the resentment of fellow Nagas against themselves”.

While he claimed to remove the negative attitude of the other people towards the Tangkhuls, he is actually advocating at the top of his voice only the negative projection of the Tangkhuls. Is he not being double standard and therefore a confused man? Everyone knows that Tuisem is arrogant. His false pride would not allow him to admit his guilt. However, how dare he drag in the whole community into it? Is he not trying to convince others that he is neutral and can be trusted even at the cost of his own community?

It is clear to one and all that, every ethnic cleansing of the Tangkhuls by the Khaplangs, especially, in Nagaland state is preceded by consistent hate campaign. Thereafter, every single killing of innocent Tangkhul civilian is justified as appropriate punishment awarded, provoked by the acts of that community. The list of the victims includes, pastors, Human Rights activist, students, govt. employees etc. Through this poisonous article, he is issuing ‘Fatwa’ for others to start killing innocent Tangkhul civilians again. It may be seriously noted that Tuisem is now a partaker of the crimes. Henceforth, he shall be held solely responsible for any harm done to the said community

If Tuisem’s intentions were really positive as he claimed, we would have been too glad to entertain him like many other church and public leaders who come and share their displeasures as well as express appreciations to the NSCN and also do pray together. But that is during ‘bright daylight’ and it would seem improper for him for such fellowship. He preferred to hatch secret schemes ‘under the darkness of the night’ and splash out wild allegations in public in the name of correction out of concern. Oh thou Judas, how bitter is your kiss of death!

The apology of Tuisem on behalf of the Tangkhuls to the Naga National Council (NNC), Federal Government of Nagaland (FGN), Khaplangs, Meiteis, Mayangs (Indians) etc. is treacherous. Does he not know the history of the Nagas?

The NNC/FGN sold out the rights of the Naga people by signing the infamous Shillong Accord of 11 Nov. 1975 which was politically suicidal and militarily a complete surrender. Thereafter, it formed People’s Militia in collaboration with the Indian Army to physically eliminate every individual refusing to accept the accord. Again, backed by India and Myanmar, hundreds of national workers were killed when they stage Military coup in 1978. Are they not responsible for the bloodshed within the Naga family? Who started all? Are we to say sorry to them for these?

Again, in 1988, backed by India and Myanmar, the power monger Khaplang attempted abortive coup against the Collective Leadership resulting in murdering hundreds of nationalists in cold blood. Nearly 200 Tangkhuls including women and children were targeted and killed for no crime of theirs. In 1996, under the so-called Peace Offensive, 37 innocent Tangkhul publics including pastors, students, Nagaland state Govt. employees, human rights activist, businessmen, women and children were killed. In 2006 and 2007, several innocent civilians belonging to the said community, including school children were killed by the Khaplangs. Not only that, but they also openly issued life threat warnings to all the Naga civil societies, restricting them from speaking for the rights of the Naga people. Today, Khaplang and his boys are declared stooges of the Indian Army. Still, to save the nation and as benevolence towards fellow Nagas, we have forgiven in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, all those who have committed wrong against us. We also believe in genuine repentance for moral weaknesses. Was confession and proclamation by the Chairman Isak Chishi Swu on behalf of the NSCN made for Tuisem to exploit to his advantage? Is our confession hypocritical like that of his? But of course, political traitors are traitors. There is no other media.

Should we really say sorry to them? Tuisem, have we not saved the Naga nation from the clutches of the traitors? Should the nationalists apologize to the Indian collaborators? What is the philosophy behind it? We are serious about this point of your line of philosophy.

The Meiteis treated us as untouchables. They have been exploiting the hill people. They are suppressing the rights of our people and are deadly opposed to the Indo-Naga solution. Is it logical for us to say sorry to them?

Mayangs (Indians) have trampled upon this peaceful land and left it bleeding for the last six decades. Are they not the aggressors? Should we ask for forgiveness from them for killing hundreds of thousand Nagas? Or do you want us to ask for forgiveness for defiling the chastity of our women folks, for burning down our granaries, houses, desecrating churches, harassing, torturing and for maiming? To our sincere knowledge, Nagas have not killed any innocent Indian in the past 60 years. Who should say sorry and to whom?

By saying ‘Time is running out for the Naga political peace process”… the ongoing Indo-Naga peace process is….…“separate and piecemeal negotiation” and that,…..“the Naga political struggle will end up in smoke”, is he not saying that there is nothing to look for in it, reducing it to mere regular exercise and thereby sending message to all that, to support it will be futile and therefore be contented with the present ‘status-quo’? Has he not identified himself with Korah who incites others to go back to Egypt? How can he predict that the time is running out? Is the ongoing Indo-Naga ‘political talks’ a piecemeal? How is he so sure that it will end up in smoke?

What made him think and ask, “Why is each faction fighting to set up its own kingdom within India? No faction seems to be fighting for a united kingdom for the Naga nation”. Is the NSCN fighting for a kingdom within India? Is the NSCN not fighting for Naga nation? This implies political connotation. By this, he is saying that the NSCN is accepting Indian constitution or Indian Union. This is a typical voice of those who are bent on destabilizing the peace process. Why is he one of them? Why is he so excited to derail the peace process by spewing venom? Is he for ‘peace’ or for ‘pieces’? How wicked and treacherous is his interpretation of the political reality of the Nagas!

We admit, that NSCN cadres are not angels but that does not mean we are devils. NSCN has a strict code of conduct that checks against committing crimes, indulging in violence or corruption. Defaulters are awarded deterrent punishment. On top of that, His Excellency, the Yaruiwo of the People’s Republic of Nagalim, Isak Chishi Swu has issued an apology to the people to forgive the NSCN for the wrongs committed by the cadres. But by telling us to…“Stop indulging in violence: kidnapping, extortion, killing/murder, etc. of fellow Nagas and the innocent public”, is he not leveling charges against us as indulging in it and thereby actually motivating the public and also garnering the opinions of the world on branding the NSCN as a terrorist organization even when GoI has officially declared, “NSCN is not a terrorist organization”?

Since from the early days till today, India has also appreciated and acknowledged the clean human rights record tract of the Nagas. Murkot Rammuny, the then Security Commissioner in Nagaland who created a reign of terror in Nagalim for many years, said: “The Nagas do not kill innocent civilians”. When reality could no longer be ignored, Gen. Thimaya, the then Chief of Indian Army who conducted military operations in Nagalim observed and declared, “Naga problem is a political issue, therefore treating it as law and order problem would be wrong”….. Lt. General F.A. Vyas of the Indian Army said: “Naga insurgents (revolutionary patriots) never adopted terror tactics”…Three Indian Army Generals including Gen. Shankar Roy Choudhury, the then Chief of Indian Army acknowledged that, “Military solution is not possible; the Naga issue is a political one requiring a peaceful political solution”. Just a couple of days back, Padmanabhaiah, the Interlocutor of the GoI stated in a seminar at Shillong that the NSCN is not a terrorist organization. Even when our opponents speak so highly of the NSCN and the Naga movement, who is Tuisem to twist the facts and speak negative? Is he not in his right possession? For his kind information, levying of taxes by government is universal and therefore, the Government of the People’s Republic of Nagalim (GPRN) is not exceptional. How can legal taxation be interpreted as extortion?

What does he mean by….“Behave and act as if you are working for the Naga nation, not for a tribe”.….....“It’s time you listen to and carry out the will of the Naga people”? When have we not behaved or not listened to the will of the Naga people? Till date, were we fooling the people? What is the will of the Naga people? Is defending for our rights to have a peaceful place to live in the world with honor, dignity and justice not the will of the Naga people? Are we not doing that? Or is it that he wished to interpret the will of the Naga people as acceptance of the Indian constitution? Does he not know that the NSCN had formed a people’s government? Does he not know that NSCN is a people based organization and that its policies are framed to serve the interest of the Naga people?

What transparency is he talking about? Has he ever heard that we have organized People’s Consultative Meetings 6 (six) times over the peace process? Is he aware that the outcome of every round of talks (60 rounds completed) is informed to the people? What more does he want?

Is Mr. Tuisem not making a ‘frog in the well’ of himself by offering, “I am ready to dialogue with any faction leader” ? When his leadership is not even accepted in his own village Shangshak, has he not really bitten off too big to chew, trying to act big brother over everybody? Be honest, Reverend. Isn’t your village divided into two groups? Isn’t your village Church too divided into two groups these days? When he is a total failure even in his own village and parent church, we hope he realizes his own size. One can put up a pretentious face before strangers but ones own villagers cannot be fooled. They know what one is made of. Naturally, Tuisem’s villagers know him too well.

As Nagas long for peace and reconciliation, the Collective Leadership, respecting the sentiments of the people, has declared peace and reconciliation, forgiving in the name of Christ, for the wrongs done to NSCN. The Church leaders and the mass based organizations under the aegis of Naga Hoho (apex social organization of the Nagas) has also been giving its all out effort for it. Presently, the Naga village Chiefs (GBs) and the Dobashis Federation are taking full initiatives to materialize it. Where was Tuisem all these days? Is he to be found only in the destructive platforms? Without him, is it so incomplete that he dismisses and supersedes all these to say that he is the only way for the solution of the Nagas?

Having done NSCN and Tangkhul bashing as a way of winning the sympathy of others, he expects to be elated to the position as a peace maker and facilitator between the so-called factions. What exactly is his intention apart from being a laughing stock?

Since the early days, he has strong reservation against the Naga national struggle for self-determination and it grew stronger and stronger as time passes by. Right after he returned from the USA, he insisted the family members of Mr. Khumkhui, one of his relatives who was serving the cause of the Naga nation, to immediately call him back.

In 1980, he spread false propaganda that the NSCN is communist. He even preached the same openly at Phungyo Baptist Church, urging people to be aware of the communist NSCN. Again, in 1996, during the Tangkhul Baptist Church centenary celebration at Ukhrul headquarters, where more than ten hundred thousands gathered from every nook and cranny of Tangkhul region besides delegates from USA and Indian sub-continent, he took that opportunity to insult the NSCN and referred to as AK 47 gun-totting undergrounds led by self-styled Captains and Majors threatening and harassing public.

He is undoubtedly a meticulous schemer. On the eves of both the 4th and on the 6th Naga People’s Consultative Meetings where the enthusiasm of all the Nagas were at its height, he churned out bombshell write-ups, ‘A Food For Thought’ and ‘A Confession’ respectively, with the intention of discrediting the achievements of the NSCN and to discourage people from attending the historic meetings. He wrote the articles with ulterior motives.

The golden history of the Naga people and its nation is written by the blood, tears and sweats of those who sacrificed everything they had. For the Nagas, there is nothing more precious than their freedom. Those who do not value this history are not worthy to be citizens. Then who is Tuisem to trample on the golden history of the Nagas and to throw it to the dustbin? God forbids. As called to defend and protect the rights of our people and our land, we will never allow any one to defy it. Not even Rev. Dr. Tuisem A Shishak.

Everything under the sky has a limit beyond which, it snaps or breaks. The National Socialist Council of Nagalim, with goodwill towards all has been fore-bearing and stressed their patience over the decades for the wrongs repeatedly committed by Rev. Dr. Tuisem A Shishak thus far. However, now a time has come for him to be accountable for his own deeds. Therefore, it is wise for Tuisem not to go beyond.

QHEVIHE CHISHI SWU Rh. RAISING
Convenor Secretary
Steering Committee, NSCN
NSCN (K) threatens to pull out of peace initiative The Morung Express
Dimapur, August 8 (MExN): The NSCN (K) today threatened to withdraw its support to the peace initiative of the joint forum of GBs and DBs saying that the forum is working at the behest of the NSCN (IM) and to hoodwink the NSCN (K) and that the forum has erred in many ways and betrayed the trust of the NSCN (K). In this connection, the NSCN (K) demanded the resignation of the convenor of the joint forum, A Taku Longkumer and Secretary Lungrahei Herie, saying that “it was under their leadership that the forum has committed the wrongs”. The NSCN (K) further warned that it would withdraw the Acceptance letter issued upon the five-point resolution.
A press release received here from the MIP/NSCN (K), while pointing out the ‘errors and betrayals’ of the joint forum, said that the GBs and the DBs took the whole matter so lightly and in unusual haste, declared the ceasefire...

between the Nagas action ‘in a lame duck meeting’ of the July 24, “only to serve the IK interests in their forthcoming meeting with the representatives of GOI” on July 31.
“We have come to learn that that the cease-fire initiative initiated by the GBs and DBs did not mean for the real peace or cease-fore between the Naga factions. But only meant to serve I-K terrorists’ interest in their last talk for the extension of Cease-fire indefinitely on the 31st July’ 07 with the GOI,” the NSCN (K) alleged. Besides that, the NSCN (K) alleged that “to hoodwink” the NSCN (K), the GBs and DBs delegation brought a draft signed by Samson Jojo of NSCN (IM) on July 11, which was different from the first five point resolution adopted by the GBs and DBs in the general meeting held at Kohima on June 6.
The NSCN (K) also said that the no official invitation letter was served to the faction with regard to the July 24 meeting where the ceasefire among the factions was declared.
The release also said that the meeting which was held at the office premises of the Deputy Commissioner of Dimapur was objectionable, and added that the Forum betrayed the “Naganess” of the meeting by inviting the Chairman of the CFMG&CFSB, Lt Gen (Retd) RV Kulkarni to the meeting. The NSCN (K) also hit out strongly at Nagaland commissioner, TN Mannen. “The I-K leadership and Nagaland Commissioner TN Mannen were the Joint architects of the present peace initiative to befool the other Naga freedom fighters, but he (Mannen) was also allowed to attend the meeting,” stated the release.
The NSCN (K) also strongly criticized the Joint Forum for inviting “Pseudo NGOs” like ‘the Naga Hoho, NSF, NPMHR etc’, to the meeting. The NSCN (K) termed these organisations as Manipuri and not Naga organisations and said that it has severed relations with these organisations.
Further the NSCN (K) alleged that the GBs and DBs delegation who met the NSCN representatives at Mon on June 26, told the NSCN (K) that the cease fire is applicable only in Nagaland state, however the release said that the Forum changed its words.
“But then on 24th July, the GBs and DBs wrote in their peace declaration paper as all over Naga inhabited areas,” the release stated. Besides, the release stated that the July 24 meeting failed to ensure the attendance of the representatives of all the factions and also failed to chalk out the modalities or terms of the agreement for the ceasefire.
JF takes serious note of clashes The Joint Forum Working Committee of Nagaland GBs Federation & Nagaland DBs Association has taken serious note of the factional clashes that took place in Tuensang and said that it would investigate into the matter.
A press release issued by the president of NGBF, K Vikuto Zhimomi and Lungrahei Herie, member secretary of JRWC, said that the forum convened an emergency meeting on August 7 and discussed strengthening the peace monitoring cell in different levels.
The release said that the point number three of the five-point resolution accepted by all the factions for ceasefire is being violated as seen in the occurrence of factional clashes in Tuensang district.
The release said that the joint forum takes on a ‘serious note’ and therefore resolved to implement the rules laid down in ‘Resolution No 3’ for proper investigation by the forum immediately for further necessary appropriate action.
The Point number 3 of the five points resolution states that to create an enabling situation, all the factions must agree for a period of six months ceasefire between them with immediate effect and if any faction refuse to abide this clarion call and appeal from the joint forum, then it shall not co-operate that defaulting group or groups. Further the resolution of point number 3 states that any if any killing takes place during the currency of ceasefire, it will be investigated of DBs and GBs and the guilty party will be brought to justice as per appropriate customary laws or such enacted laws as may deem fit.
The joint forum once again appealed to all the three factions to honour their own written acceptance of the ceasefire among them. The release further said that the joint forum has decided to meet the top leaders of the three factions to strengthen the five point resolution.
Kuknalim.com responds to Thohe The Morung Express
One Mr Thohe Pao from Pune has been writing in local dailies about kuknalim.com promoting tribalism and being in favour of Non-Nagas. Kuknalim.com’s doors have been opened to all Nagas across the globe irrespective of their likes and dislikes. We have successfully run the largest forum with over 2.3 lakh topics for the Nagas over 6 years.
Members have a chance to express their views openly and honestly. The moderators work hard to maintain edit the forums based on the feedback from other members. All Kuknalim.com members agree to the websites policies by registering in the website and the administrators take no responsibility for the forum content.
Nagas from Tankghul, Zeliang, Lotha, Angami, Sema and Ao tribes are involved in managing and maintaining Kuknalim.com except with the involvement of our Technical Administrator who himself is ‘Anglo-Indian’ and married to a Naga.
In Thohe’s article, he blames Kuknalim.com’s site administrator for promoting tribalism and in favour of Non-Nagas. Thohe commented on a member slandering the NSCN.
Kuknalim.com has disabled the particular member from logging onto the system as according to the websites policies. We have warned the member over the past year. We are on the look out for others like him and we heavily rely on feedback from the other 5600 registered members.
Thohe also accuses that Kuknalim.com “ignores” articles based on “Naga issues” and is ignorant about the importance of Naga issues. We do not “ignore” all articles. On the other hand, Kuknalim.com encourages its members and guests to submit news articles. Kuknalim.com publishes articles from Nagaland dailies, Naga organizations and groups.
Thohe accused Kuknalim.com about a picture posted in its Picture Gallery about a Naga girl was killed in 2005. That was one picture that displayed gore. If there are other Naga issues, members like yourselves have not taken the initiative to upload pictures. Pictures and articles that are constructive in nature are appreciated. Inhumane pictures like these WILL NOT be published for any reason.
Thohe, Thank you for pointing out forums that were written by guests in 2005. As the face of the internet and information changes so rapidly, old forum messages are archived and removed from the website. Moreover, that topic has been removed a long time. It is not advisable to base your article on out dated topics like these.
The Kuknalim.com site administrator has procedures in place to control articles of this nature on a regular basis. While it is impossible to monitor the site in real time due to constraints, moderators spend significant time on the forums to weed these articles out.
If you have more suggestions, Kuknalim.com is happy to communicate with you to better its website rather than raising popularity for Kuknalim.com in this fashion.
While we have a policy that Site Administrators are not responsible for comments on the website, we do appreciate your concern. Naga leaders need to know that this article is misleading and false as it is based on already corrected measures in Kuknalim.com Whilst this discussion has taken place, the popular giant Kuknalim.com continues to receive articles from all Organizations, Groups, Newspapers across the globe on Nagas across the globe.
N. Yan Murry Co-founder & Site Administrator kuknalim.com
AASU border march fails to take-off Limalenden Longkumer Morung Express
Mokokchung The proposed incursion called by the All Assam Students Union (AASU) towards Longtho under Tsurangkong range of Mokokchung district, Nagaland, and the propaganda to dismantle the Nagaland police check post at Tsutapala failed, even as about five hundred AASU volunteers proceeded from Maraini up to Sonawal. The AASU called off its stir and withdrew from Sonawal, a small township at the Assam-Nagaland border, about five kilometers away from Tsutapala, after the district administration of Jorhat intervened. This was disclosed during a brief informal meeting held between the Deputy Commissioner of Mokokchung and his Jorhat counterpart. Both the Superintendents of Police Mokokchung and Jorhat as well as leaders of Ao Senden were also present at the meeting held at Tsutapala at the Assam-Nagaland border. The Jorhat DC LS Changsan said that situation at the Assam side of the border was under control. She also expressed regret over the turn of events that had been developing in the border region over the past few months. Implying that the Assam-Nagaland border dispute should be brought to a compromise, she said, “There has to be some meeting point.” The Mokokchung DC Abhishek Singh while interacting with his Jorhat counterpart said that the people of Assam should understand the land holding system in Nagaland.
The administration of both districts of Jorhat and Mokokchung felt that the bone of contention of the dispute is that the people of Assam claim that the Nagas are encroaching Assam’s forest land while the Nagas claim otherwise. The Nagas claim that they are only living in their own land, which has been theirs since time immemorial. However, a leader of Ao Senden, Wabong Walling, held a different view of the situation. He was apprehensive that there might be some other external elements responsible for the latest state of affairs in the border. The Nagas had been living peacefully with the people of Assam even during the head-hunting days, he said.
The withdrawal of the proposed march by the AASU from Sonawal in Assam averted a full scale confrontation between the peoples of the two neighbouring states of Assam and Nagaland. Volunteers from all the villages under Tsurangkong range numbering several thousands were found in the area apparently ready for any kind of combat. Meanwhile, fretfulness and apprehension crept Mokokchung town today with volunteers from all fifteen wards of Mokokchung town converging by the thousands at the premises of the Ao Senden’s office, most of them with daos and spears and other combat gears. There was enormous pressure from the volunteers that they may be permitted by the Ao Senden to go down to Tsutapala, which is about seventy kilometers away from Mokokchung town. However, the Ao Senden leaders did not give consent to their demand, since the AASU had withdrawn their march. Nonetheless, some volunteers did proceed towards Tsutapala on their own. The general interpretation of the Ao Nagas is that the proposed march by AASU amounts to invasion by intruders as per Ao Naga customary practice. An air of tension and an uneasy calm has been enveloping Mokokchung ever since the news of the proposed march by the AASU, scheduled to take place today i.e. August 8, appeared in a vernacular newspaper. Observers of the whole scenario cannot be wrong when they opine that the AASU proposal had hurt the sentiments of the people of Mokokchung to a great extent. No untoward incident was reported till the filing of this news.
Nagaland GBs and DBs' initiation for peace- Nagaland Post
In continuation of our earlier press statements, the MIP department GPRN is directed by the council to issue the following statement in relation to the peace or ceasefire initiation under taken by the Nagaland GBs Federation and DBs Association.
It is no doubt that the GPRN/NSCN is always longing for peace and tranquility among the Nagas in Nagaland. But we strongly assert that our good intentions should not be used to serve someone's interests. We have come to learn that the peace initiative initiated by the GBs and DBs did not mean for real peace or ceasefire between the Naga factions. But only meant to serve IK terrorist' interest in their last talk for the extension of ceasefire indefinitely on July 31 2007 with the GOI. The commissions and omissions committed by the GBs and Dbs in peace initiation between the Naga factions are enumerated as follows-
1. The first 5-point resolution adopted by the Gbs and DBs in general meeting held at Kohima on the 6th of June 2007 was accepted by the GPRN/NSCN in principle. But on their next visit to GPRN's office at Mon on July 11, the GBs and DBs delegation brought a different draft signed by Samson Jajo of IK terrorists and the leaders of the Joint Forum of GBs and Dbs in order to hoodwink the NSCN.
2. The 24th July meeting wherein they declared ceasefire between the factions was only announced in the newspapers and no official invitation letter was served to the NSCN.
3. The 24th July meeting was held at the office premises of the Deputy Commissioner of Dimapur which was objectionable.
4. The GPRN/NSCN had already severed relation with the Naga Hoho, NSF, NPMHR, etc (Manipur Organization) and not Nagaland organization, but knowing fully this fact, the GBs and DBs defiantly invited theses pseudo NGOs to the meeting.
5. Since it was a meeting of the Nagas only, the Forum betrayed the Naganess in the process by inviting the chairman of CFMG and CFSB, Lt. Gen (Retd) R.V. Kulkarni to attend the meeting.
6. The IK leadership and Nagaland Commissioner T.N. Mannen were joint architects of the present peace initiative to befool the other Naga freedom fighters but he was also allowed to attend the meeting.
7. When the GBs and DBs delegation met the NSCN representatives at Mon on the 26th June, the first question the NSCN representatives asked was whether the ceasefire was applicable only in the Nagaland state or entire Naga inhabited areas. The GBs and DBs delegation replied that it was only meant for the Nagaland state. But on the 24th July, the GBs amd Dbs wrote in their peace declaration paper as "all over Naga inhabited areas".
8. It has been unmistakably found that the leaders of the GBs and DBs took the matter so lightly and in unusual haste made a declaration of ceasefire between the Nagas in their forthcoming meeting with the representatives of GOI.
9. The 24th July meeting failed to ensure the attendance of the representative of all the factions and also failed to chalk out modalities or terms of the agreements for the ceasefire.
From the above given points, the GPRN/NSCN could be unhesitant to say that the leaders of the Nagaland GBs and DBs had erred in many ways and betrayed the trust of the GPRN/NSCN. As such, the GPRN/NSCN asks the convener of the Joint Forum, A. Taku Longkumer and secretary Lungrahei Herei, to step down from their positions. Because whoever might have been responsible for the wrongs committed by the two organizations, it was under their leadership the Forum had committed the wrongs. Failing which the GPRN/NSCN will withdraw the acceptance letter issued upon the 5-point resolutions.
Secretary, MIP, GPRN/NSCN-K
Disentangling the Assam-Nagaland Border Dispute Dolly Kikon | Sanjay Barbora Column Morung Express
Singibil and Athkhel weekly haats (marts) are among several intercommunity markets along the Assam-Nagaland foothills which are significant signposts of a long historical, political and cultural relationship and ties between the Nagas, Ahoms and several other indigenous communities in the Brahmaputra valley. These markets were established in pre-colonial times when Naga elders and the Ahom nobility created such spaces as political and cultural zones to settle disputes, negotiations and trade. However, these spaces are likely to disappear in the near future if the political discourse on the Assam-Nagaland border dispute continues to emphasize on sealing movements of people and trade by demarcating the border as rigid zones. Even as the Government of Assam continues with its new project to equip ex-service men with arms to protect and guard the foothills of Assam, there are series of protests, blockades and ‘awareness’ campaigns being planned out by the All Assam Students Union (AASU) and Asom Jatiyatabadi Yuba Chattra Parishad (AJYCP) in several foothill villages within the jurisdiction of the government of Assam. Such measures are signs of an impending emergency and considered to be urgent and exceptional steps to pressurize the government of Assam and Nagaland to settle the dispute. Arming inhabitants in the border villages is reminiscent of other national emergencies such as war, resistance and natural disaster, where the rule of law remains in suspended animation.
Conflicts and violence to settle interstate disputes in the Northeast region are common, but these demands reveal how the creation of borders and boundaries in this region are rooted in a discourse shaped by colonial intervention. Colonial legal framework, which helped establish the plantations, coalmines, and oil as part of an extractive economy in this frontier region, continues to operate in the Brahmaputra valley and along the foothills of Nagaland and Assam. The persistence of colonial laws and deployment of excessive military powers in Northeast India are argued to be exceptional situations where military rationale supersedes civic concerns. The Northeast region of India has been under a state of exception for the last six decades. Given the number of security agencies that operate from this region – whether for protecting the territorial integrity of India or for counterinsurgency operations – one may argue that the region does not require another regulation to arm inhabitants and civilians to protect themselves. However, exceptions such as these expose the contradictions of India’s ongoing efforts to chart out an alternate discourse for the region. Even as there is talk of governmental plans of looking east, several inter-state border disputes in Northeast India with overlapping territorial claims, have exposed the inherent paradoxes of post-colonial state formation in the region.
Since the 19th century, the foothills of the Naga Hills have witnessed series of demarcations of boundaries for plantations, forests and oil exploration. Such activities are not new. Historically, these foothills have been subject to several violent laws and regulations. For instance, the colonial regulation – the Inner Line Permit (ILP) –, which continues to operate in the Northeastern states of Nagaland, Mizoram, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh, originated in the foothills of Naga Hills to specifically guard and regulate the movements of people from the hills to the colonial plantations along the foothills in the 19th century. Therefore, the current understanding of territorial units is largely based on the colonial cartographic techniques and governance. Such colonial techniques based on natural signposts such as trees, rivers and villages, were meant to protect the colonial plantations and administrators in the valley, raise revenue and regulate movements of people. More than four decades later, the national committees set up to settle the Assam-Nagaland border dispute have continued to apply the colonial method, even though the natural signposts have undergone transformations.
Events that pit Nagas against the Assamese have been few and far between in Gelekey on the border between Nagaland and Assam. The area is dotted with tea plantations and gas gathering stations (GGS). The former have been around for over a hundred years and are owned by a mix of corporate houses, non-local proprietors and of late – small tea growers – local people who have converted private and ceiling land into small agricultural holdings, growing tea leaves that are sold to larger estates that have factories. The Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC), a public sector company that disinvested in the 1990s, own the gas gathering stations in the area. The foothill areas are also rich in strains of coal. Most of the mines are located on the ‘Naga side’ of the border, while the traders (in coal) are mainly from Assam, though they are compelled to have Naga associates because the lands (and mines) are under the purview of Article 371 (A) that is applicable to state of Nagaland. Between the plantations and gas gathering stations, there are very few industries and agriculture and trading in coal continues to be the mainstay of the local communities. Thus, the livelihoods of local people in Gelekey are deeply intertwined with the two major industries (tea and oil) and marginally with the third (coal). Most families in Gelekey get seasonal employment in these enterprises. Those with land titles along the Assam side of the border can barely eke out a living through agriculture and usually see it fit to lease out land to the tea and oil sector. On the Naga side of the border, both individual and community land leases are unable to deal with the growing impoverishment of the subsistence farming sector and demographic growth. Therefore individuals and collectives have begun to experiment with other forms of earning a living. The money obtained from coalmines and newly planted tea and rubber estates are an important source of income.
There are a few events that stand out, like dots waiting to be connected, in the whole affair that led to the so-called clashes. On January 23, 2007, Nilikesh (Dul) Gogoi, a resident of Gelekey and a popular figure among both Naga and Assamese inhabitants along the border, and his colleague Bholu Gogoi were executed by personnel of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), as they were returning from Anakhi village after dinner. The deaths caused widespread anger among people in Assam and the adjoining villages in Nagaland and the testimony of the surviving colleague showed that the official version (put out by the state) claiming in turns that this was a routine encounter, then changing to a mistake and eventually ending with a flurry of compensation packages to the families of the victims, was nothing but a farce. On May 29, 2007, Assam Police Battalion personnel killed a young Naga man – S. Alemmongba – who was responsible for looking after the welfare of casual workers in his brother’s small tea garden near Gelekey. The official version stated that Alemmongba tried to attack them with a machete and they were compelled to fire upon him. Witnesses working in the fields said about eighteen policemen entered the area, slapped the victim a few times, pushed him to the ground and shot him from a point blank range. Two empty casings of Kalashnikov shells and scores of eyewitness accounts confirm the gormless quality of the Assam police’s version of events. The last event that needs immediate mention is the one where some armed Naga persons entered a village near Gelekey and killed two persons and burned livestock. The reaction to the third event has been widely reported in the press, but it bears repeating here. Organisations like AASU and AJYCP called for an economic blockade of Nagaland. The security apparatus in the area and politicians in Dispur, made sympathetic noises regarding the action and seemed outraged by the violent action that they attributed to “Naga miscreants”.
Local figures like Nilikesh Gogoi and S. Alemmongba represent the disruptive voices in the border transformation. They disturb the neat script of pliable natives who, once corrupted and coerced into being part of the extractive economy, begin to act as local points-persons for further exploitation of the region. Instead, with their alternate agenda of creating economic enterprise out of local resources and constantly laying claim to the pre-colonial economy of indigenous control over resources, they go against the very logic of corporate privatisation of land. Though it is near impossible to attribute a sinister plot to their deaths, both events are united in the large-scale anger that they generated in the area. It was as if people had momentarily forgotten their ties to the oil and plantation economy and mourned for the death of those who called for alternatives. Yet, these protests did not change the realities on the ground. If anything, the recent round of violence only reiterates the continuing stranglehold of events that are beyond the control of communities who live along the border.
In the last few decades, Naga and Assamese rebels allegedly traversed the foothills on their way to training camps in the hills. In response, the state has positioned armed personnel along the foothills. In addition, given the history of counterinsurgency, the area is also dotted with informers and spies who constitute the clandestine community that is part of any social setting in places that have witnessed protracted armed conflict. They are important elements in fostering a political climate of suspicion and fear. Anthropologist Talal Asad says that suspicion occupies a space between law and its applications. He argues that, “all judicial and policing systems on the modern state presupposes organized suspicion, incorporate margins of uncertainty”. The uncertainties in places like Gelekey are compounded due to legal provisions that allow security agencies to operate with impunity. These borders are considered as disturbed areas and fall not only within the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (1958) but also under several security regulations, which protect the plantations and oil installations. In a milieu rife with ambiguities, the manner in which the state and civic organisations like the student and youth, bodies are seeking to establish order along the border is dangerous. The disregard for local histories and communitarian memories has always been an impediment to conflict resolution in the region. If the marts at Singibil and Athkhel do not reopen soon, the symbols of the last vestiges of a pre-colonial social formation and polity will have given way to the military-industrial complex’s vision of change along the border areas. It is not a very promising vision for the future for the people who live along the border, as well as for a larger ethical politics of respect for peoples within the region.