[Previous entry: "Naga issue to be Cong plank- Party kicks off Nagaland campaign, douses rebellion in Assam- No choppers for Tripura OUR CORRESPONDENT The Telegraph"] [Next entry: "Naga rebel barb at PC NISHIT DHOLABHAI"]

03/26/2009: "Unity first, insists Azheto Chophy ‘UNITY AND RECONCILIATION IS OUR ROADMAP’ Eastern Mirror"

Unity first, insists Azheto Chophy ‘UNITY AND RECONCILIATION IS OUR ROADMAP’ Eastern Mirror

Driving about 30 kilometres from Dimapur town towards Niuland, a dusty road leads to Khehoi village. A few kilometres further uphill, construction of roads and camps are in full swing in the NSCN/GPRN designated camp. Kilo Kilonser of the group, Azheto Chophy, lives in one of the heavily guarded huts overlooking the plains of Niuland sub-division. Speaking to Ngathingkhui Jagoi in a Face to Face conversation, the 62-year-old NSCN/GPRN leader dwells at length on how Nagas can come together. EXCERPTS

EASTERN MIRROR: As a Kilo Kilonser (home minister) of the NSCN/GPRN, what is the biggest problem that you are facing on the home front?
AZHETO CHOPHY: There is no problem for me. But there is a problem of the Naga people.

EM: No problem for you but a problem for the Nagas ….?
AC: Yes. Due to fratricidal killings, mistrust among Naga organisations and the like, we are today in turmoil. We already have enough widows and orphans; too many people have been lost in these senseless killings among Naga brethrens. There is an urgent need to stop all these and unite to become one Naga family in order to solve the decades-old Indo-Naga political issue.

EM: Do you have a roadmap towards this dream of making a single Naga family?
AC: Roadmap? Oh yes, there is … everybody knows the roadmap. We need to unite before any solution. We have to by all means. If there is unity, we can assume that solution to the Naga problem is not far off. Indian leaders, foreigners and Naga people say we should first unite to solve the Indo-Naga political problems. Why should we divide among ourselves as east, west, north and south Nagas? This is our own creation. We are one and if we can remove this barrier, there is solution to the decades-old Naga political problem. So unity and reconciliation is the roadmap. Heaven will also be glad if Nagas can come together as one.

EM: But when you think that Nagas should be united why create another faction?
AC: Another faction? Oh, no ... there you got me wrong again. Look, I or for that matter, we are not against the leadership of uncle Isak and Muivah. They have taken the Nagas to this far. We are neither against the leadership of Khaplang and Kitovi nor the Adino or any Naga leaders who are fighting for the Nagas’ right to self determination. We are here for Nagas’ unity. This camp at Khehoi is not an IM, K or NNC’s camp. This is a camp purely for Naga unity. We have taken this initiative due to people’s pressure.
See, talks for unification of all Naga national groups were held at Zunheboto 4 or 5 times in Zunheboto and unanimously declared that there is no dispute in the leadership of Isak and Muivah. The meeting in 1st week of June 2006 also decided to endorse the ongoing peace process, request other groups to revoke the quit notice served to the Tangkhuls and there should be only one government. The district was declared as peace zone. That means we accept Isak and Muivah’s leadership. You ask the Naga people. They are the masters. But fighting started and so much blood has been shed since then.

EM: But instead of becoming one another one more group was born …
AC: I have said we are not a faction. This camp belongs does not belong to any faction. Rather this is a place for Nagas to come together. But look, while we try to work out for all Nagas to come together, our names are struck out. But we are still for the Nagas aspiration for self determination by uniting as one, I have repeatedly said. Everybody longs for unity and reconciliation and above all solution to the Naga problem. Those who don’t come to the wishes of the people are anti-people. You know why? People are the masters. Every organization should respect the other.

EM: NSCN/GPRN has come out stating it will not to spare any misadventures. What is meant by misadventures? Are you talking about your own misadventures?
AC: Our public relations and NGOs kilonser Wangting Konyak has written about it. He will be in the best position to explain about it. As of now, I have no idea how he has written.

EM: A sudden paradigm shift seems to have come up in the revolution ideologies and the demands of Khaplang. He has reportedly come out stating that Nagas alone demanding for independence is not viable as reported in Imphal electronic media. Does it mean that the Nagas should struggle together with all the NE underground groups for self determination of the whole region?
AC: The agenda or that kind of politics is too wide for me to give any comments. But as far as I know, our demands have not changed. Uncle Khaplang might have said because the seven sister states are all demanding independence. As far as I remember, we trained Meiteis, Assamese and whatever groups that come seeking our helps when we were in Eastern Nagaland. But as of now, we are for unity of all Naga groups. That’s all I can tell you now.

EM: Nagas long for peace and reconciliation of all groups and the recently held Naga Consultative Meet has been largely hailed by all sections. However, few dissenting voices were noted; for instance the main opposition Congress party stayed away from it. What is your comment?
AC: I don’t want to comment on that. But to share my views with you, Parliamentary Affairs Committee (PAC) is purely DAN government which consists of certain political parties. I think it is politics. If the invitation had come from other Naga social organisations, who knows Congress might have accepted the invitation.

EM: NSCN-IM wants other Naga national organisations to remove the ‘road block’. Is NSCN/GPRN ready to remove the road blocks?
AC: Look, I have said in the beginning. The quit notice served to the Tangkhuls have been revoked. Tangkhul Hoho (TNL) came here and we discussed at length on the matter and other issues. We have freed NSCN-IM workers whom we arrested without any condition. We treated them equal when they were in our custody. All Tangkhuls are not bad. Likewise, all Sumis are not bad either. We should come to a meeting point. I was deadly against tribalism even when I was in NSCN-K. I am a national worker who yearns for solution of the Naga political problem through ‘unity first solution next’. But Isak and Muivah wants just the reverse. Again, what NSCN-IM terms roadblock is snapping ties with other non-Naga groups. But that is not possible. We gave them training when we were in eastern Nagaland, we are helping them today. NSCN-IM also gives training to some groups.
Concerned Nagas in Australia on Naga Consultative Meet morungexpress
An open letter to Neiphiu Rio, Chief Minister of Nagaland and chairman PAC Government of Nagaland and Dr. T.M. Lotha, chairman PAC DAN, concerning the Naga Consultative Meet.

•-We wish to acknowledge and thank Rev Louliehu Imsong for his initial proposal to the Chief Minister (CM) of Nagaland to hold a Non-Resident Naga Summit (NRNS) in Nagaland. We believe this original suggestion eventually resulted in overseas Nagas attending the NCM. We also acknowledge the efforts of the CM to organise the Naga Consultative Meet (NCM) in an effort to set up a platform for all Nagas to come together.
According to our understanding, it was Rev Louliehu Imsong’s suggestions to the CM which led to the proposal for an Non-Resident Naga Summit to be held at Kohima from the 3rd of December 2008. A few of us Nagas here in Australia were contacted by Rev Louliehu, saying that our names had been sent to the CM office as representatives of Nagas in Australia. We were not consulted beforehand on this initiative. Soon after, we received an invitation emailed from the CM’s office. Some of us declined while one of us requested the CM’s office for a summit agenda. There was no response to that request. We were later told the summit had been postponed to March 2009. On the 15th October 2008, a few Naga individuals received, through mass email, what appeared to be an open invitation to attend the “first meeting of non resident Nagas with leaders of Naga society”.
After this, we were not aware of any new developments regarding the NRN meeting. Some of us read a little about the NCM through the media but we were not informed about it. Some concerns were expressed to one of the two Nagas attending the meeting over whether the NCM had replaced the NRN meeting to which we had been invited earlier. The response was that the summit and the NCM were “totally unrelated”.
The formation of a so-called ‘Overseas Naga Association’ during the NCM and the presentation of the research papers by the overseas Nagas came as a surprise to most of the concerned Nagas here in Australia. We were completely in the dark regarding the process to invite overseas Nagas to the NCM, the formation of the ‘ONA’ and about the NCM itself. A majority of the Nagas here in Australia are very concerned over the way this series of events has transpired.
We seek clarification over whether any overseas Nagas were included in the preliminary discussions to hold a Naga Consultative Meet and in the formulation of its agenda. Were civil society organizations in Nagaland included in the preparatory discussions for the meeting?
We also seek to know whether overseas Nagas who attended the event were invited to contribute as individuals or as representatives of individual communities of Nagas from their resident country. Furthermore, if the overseas Nagas were invited as individuals, then we seek to know the criteria by which they were selected to present themselves and their papers. To put it bluntly, are they really in touch with what they are talking about?
If the press reports of the overseas Naga contributions are in any way accurate, the overseas Nagas appears to have played a major role in the consultative meet and there was little that appeared unique or new in the perspectives they offered. They appeared to repeat what the Naga civil society organizations are already struggling to achieve, and what every Naga understands the Naga national workers should be doing.
To conclude, we support the good intentions which we believe motivated the recent NCM. However, we remain deeply disturbed by the mysterious processes surrounding it. The lack of transparency and exclusiveness in the process seriously undermines its best possible outcomes. Meyanungsang Kichu, Narola Changkija, Salome Zhimomi, Chon Raman, Sanchobeny Murry, Temsü Longchari, Inotoli Zhimomi on behalf of all the concerned Nagas in Australia.

Nagas in Australia express concern

•-We, the Nagas living in Australia, wish to express our deep concern over recent reports in the Nagaland press of the formation of a so-called ‘Overseas Naga Association’.
First, some background to our concerns. Some of us here in Australia received invitations from the Chief Minister last year to attend a meeting called the Non-Resident Naga Summit to be held in December 2008. Our understanding of that summit was that it would be a gathering to canvass ways to further the development of Nagaland. As far as we understand, that summit was then postponed until March 2009. But we are not aware whether that summit, as it was originally proposed, has ever taken place. We are not aware of any move or decision to form a body representing overseas Nagas in Nagaland.
Thus it came as a great shock to us Nagas here in Australia when we heard that an entity called the ‘Overseas Naga Association’ had been established at the recent Naga Consultative Meeting.
Let us be very clear. This entity was created without the knowledge of the majority of the Nagas in Australia. There was no consultation with us. Neither consent nor a mandate was given. It was also reported that one of us here, Temsü Longchari, had been appointed an office bearer of the entity representing Australia. He was not consulted and did not consent to this. This, as we understand, suggest that the ONA was formed representing all of us Non Resident Nagas.
Reports of the establishment of this entity have left us with many urgent and unanswered questions.
What are the aims of this body? Was it formed to represent just a few Naga individuals living overseas? If that is the case, in what capacity does it intend to contribute to the Naga society? What role does it leave for all other overseas Nagas?
Alternatively, if this association claims to represent all Nagas living abroad, then what process was involved to include any of us in its formation? Why were all the Nagas in Australia not informed about the move to set up this body? Why were we not invited as a community to participate in its creation? Why were we kept in the dark? And in fact, why was the ‘overseas body’ formed in Nagaland, and not overseas? It makes sense for an association of overseas Nagas to actually be formed, founded or created by overseas Nagas.
We are also wondering whether other Nagas spread out across the world – through North America, Britain, Europe, New Zealand, and other parts of Asia – are also asking themselves these difficult questions. How many Nagas overseas have been excluded from this ‘Overseas Naga Association’?
If we are not Nagas living overseas, then in whose name was this entity created?

Migration of tribe and traditional boundary of the Yimchungrü Naga Posted by administrator on CDT Throngso Yimchungru
Like any other tribes of Nagas, the Yimchungrü tribe has also no proper written record of its origin and history. However, based on oral tradition, the historical accounts have been handed down from generation since time immemorial. Since from the very inception, the migration of human society from one place to another has been an important aspect, which shaped and reshaped the human history.
For instance, the Maori people who migrated from Havaiki in the eastern pacific to Aotearao “Land of the long white clouds”, which later became New Zealand when the Europeans migrated to the islands and defeated the Maoris. India has also migrated from central Asia especially Aryan race, however, though non-Aryan race has considered as aborigines of India. Yet their ancestors too must have migrated to India in different waves. Like wise, on the basis of language family, Sir, G.A. Grierson has noted that Nagas are speakers of Tibeto-Burman, who came with the second wave of migration from North Western China between the upper waters of the Yangtse-Kiang and Hoang-Ho Rivers.
The Yimchungru also believed to be migrated along with the rest of the world from China, which is through Thailand, Burma and along Irrawady-Chindwin rivers. They crossed and settled around Tukaho, along the Burma border and finally reached Moru (in India). From Moru to Chiru, Chiru to Longyang, from Longyang to Thunyim Kiulong (fifty household village) and Thunyim Kiulong to Kiuro (six hundred household village). In fact, they migrated and crossed and covered the present Saramati areas along Tizu River and then Zungke River, further upstream and surrounding areas establishing settlements. For time being, they settled at Mih-pokpung which is located near the Yayi River and Zunke river confluence between the present Thononyu and Sikiur village after which they established a historical village called Kemiphu near present Wongphungru village.
This village is regarded as a historical village because after drinking water from a stream, six dialectical groups originated i.e. Langayu, Tikhiyu, Jiyu, Mukhokyu, Longphuryu and Phunungyu. Since then people scattered into different direction in groups in search of better place to settle and fertile land for agricultural productivity. As such, some group of people went towards North Eastern side and established a village called Tophungkiulong near present Pokphur village. Some group of people especially Makhokyu, Juyi and Thikhiyu established a village called Thsunkiuso where as Langayu, Longphuryu and Phunongu group of people moved from one place to another without any destination as nomadic life. A group of these people when they were fishing at the confluence of the Yayi river and Thurakkie river, they found a partly burnt firewood floating from the river Yayi. This discovery made them curious of other human settlement towards the source of Yayi River. And hence, a large group in number started risky expedition towards the farther upstream in search of human settlement. At last, as they reached certain point, they find clearing of jungles for cultivation and other sign of human activities. Out of sudden they shout one another. As a result, after recognizing one another they came to know that they are brothers and they called it Yimkhiungto meaning “searched and found it”. Thus this place was called Yimkhiungto. Thereater, some group of people returned to their place where they come. Nevertheless, half of the number joined with their lost brothers and established a village called Yimkhiung Aünrü. Therefore, in short Yinchungrü/ Yimkhiungrü is comprised of six brothers with same father.
Those groups of people moved back towards eastern direction spread out around mount Saramati and even beyond who are now considered as Naga-Burma. A large number of people stay behind around Yimchung Aün village and established a remarkable village called Langa below present Kutu-awurhü village. This village was established by a name of a person Lango and his associates from Yimchung Aün village. This village was approximately 900 house hold, however due to internal feuds among the villagers the village was dispersed into different direction and most of them become other tribes like Sema, Chang, Ao, Khiammungan and Sangtam.
Though it has been formulated on the basis of hypothesis, yet while digging the terra incognita ancestral history through compares and systematic observe and study from length and breath of the Yimchungrü inhabited areas, the problem seem to be quite simple. The six dialectal groups have almost common features of ancestral site and cultures. The language variation developed due to communication gap because headhunting cultures was quite common. Thereby, each village considered to be independent body and only brave village could settle in a particular village or place for a longer period. Therefore, the question of dialectal group to be considered as tribe does not arise in any sense but it was in fact distortion history developed by outside writers and careless writers, the innocent people drag into the game of horror.
In regard to traditional boundary, the Yimchungrü bordered with Myanmar in the eastern side, the north eastern side with Khiamnungan, the extreme North with Chang, the South Western part with Sumi and North Western part with Sangtam.
The eastern part of the Yimchungrü’s land reaches to the confluence of the river Zungki and Tizu River and then without any interruption extends to Araru village to the Irrawady river and Chindwin rive. The continuous stretches finally adjoined to Konton (where gold is mined) The irrevocable boundary pillar was erected by A.Z Phizo and the president of the Kachin across Konton at a distance of about one days journey from Konton.
On the side of the North Eastern part, it touches 95 longitude and it stretches to Arimrhihtak (meaning place of burning of the spirits lion cloth) which comes under the domain of the Mukhokyu dialect of Yimchungrü. Therefore, it extends to Kumong Keking also known as Thur or Tsuphuru. From there it goes on along the ridge of Sangla hill. In the year 1950 Mr. Wungto DB of Noklak and M. Lakhum DB of Tuensang the boundary dispute were settled between the Chindi village and Kewung village. After prolong discussion the matter solved amicably wherein Chindi village lies on the Khiamnungan’s side and Kewung lies on the side of Yimchungrü. On that day, when Mr. Wungto DB and Mr. M. Lakhum DB went to demarcate the land, as a token of love and concerned, Khiamungan presented shawls to both of them but Mr. M. Lakhum flatly refused to accept it. This marked the boundary between Wongphongru village and Poi village by the river flowing therein. Thereon it goes along the Yinke River to Tsahiu River up to Shute village, Tongyang village, Alam village and Kemüzah. In order to proof the identification of the boundary, Khumkiumong had erected a dao as pillar at Kemüzah. The continuous stretches of boundary connect to Wacho village where a stone pillar erected to demarcate the Kutoawuhrü village boundary.
On the extreme North, Tuensang town hall (tin ali) along Mokokchung road highway up to Helipong (hirupong meaning cutting down of paddy crops as it would not bear grains).
On the North Western part, goes on along the Mokokchung road below Angangbah village where Azhihmong from Langa village and Tsangangshe exchanged their spears as a symbol of peace between the two communities and also indicating the boundary.
On the Western part, it extends to Khumongshihyi which is bounded by Kutoshe, Mukhiuktongru and Kitaho. From there it goes to Tothsang village near Huker and goes on to Ayipongru also known as Hanso village.
On the south side, it pushes towards Shothu village established by Shothu son of Shihtongpu then farther more to extend of Pongrong village and Rithseshi village across Arimshingyi to Sangrup village.
In between the upper and lower Yimchungrü, the boundary shares with Kiphere town where the Britishers had erected a stone pillar.For any justification and correction, the author is ready to accept and answerable.

Research Scholar, Department of History & Archaeology NU
NSCN (I-M) on recent disturbances in Lapnam and Lajo CDT
No revolutionary movement anywhere in the world begins with public harassment. Any revolutionary organization that claimed to be people’s movement tried to earn people’s sympathy and not go the way to bulldoze people’s sentiments. The current happening in Lapnam and Lajo in Khonsa district of Arunachal Pradesh smack of anti-social groups invading the villages to loot and disturb the whole socio-economic set-up. To make the matter worse the security forces, particularly the Assam Rifles (the so called friends of the hills people) are not doing anything to come to the rescue of the people.
After the fighting started in March 12 when the combine forces of K-group, ULFA, MPA and KIA comes under attack by Naga Army of NSCN for creating public nuisance and harassing the villagers by way of extorting cash and properties of the Lapnam villagers, the village settlements was in total disarray. Tension has been mounting with the menfolk leaving the villages as they are already on a collision course with the marauding forces. With no help or protection coming from the
19 Assam Rifles located just 10 Km away from Khonsa town the Naga Army was placed in a situation where they have to exercise and shoulder heavy responsibility to come to the rescue of the villagers. Clashes have started at Maklua, Lamchan, Langpu and Tingsa. In the next attack that followed at Lapnam Naga Army killed three of the combine forces on the spot and injuring many.
But after facing the pressure from Naga Army at Lapnam, the combine forces numbering around 80 have shifted to Lajo but the villagers are already bearing the full brunt. The villagers are forced to shell out anything of value like finger ring, and ear ring, necklace if they could not pay in cash. Many houses were destroyed, including schools. Leaving them in such a state of shock the helpless villagers are approaching the Naga Army for protection, as they have lost hope in security forces. In and around the area, the presence of 3 Dogra regiment, 36 battalion of CRPF and 19 Assam Rifles are visibly seen.
But for the villagers these forces are of no use, after their repeated appeals for protection proved futile. Instead, they are turning to Naga Army. In the meantime most of the affluent families have shifted to the state capital to escape the torment of the forces led by K-group and KIA with ULFA and Manipur’s MPA actively involved. These groups are moving from village to village extorting, and the Assam Rifles stationed at Noklo not doing anything to intervene.
On the part of the state government it was in quandary dealing with the anti-social groups. Compelled by the worsening situation and in consultation with the Home Ministry the area covering the Khonsa district has been placed under the “draconian “Armed Forces Special Power Act (AFSPA). But despite this move, the Assam Rifles are yet to wake up to stand by the side of the villagers. This has become the turning point for the villagers, forcing the rich families to escape to Itanagar.
This is the plight of the Lajo, the latest victim of the K-group, MPA, ULFA and KIA looting spree to make their presence felt.
But the biggest question is- why the Para-military forces in the troubled areas are not countering the groups as pleaded by the locals? The suspicious behavior and passive role played by the central forces have aroused deep sense of indignation in the public psyche.
Issued by: MIP/GPRN.
Court raps AR on 2004 killing By Our Staff Reporter Sangai Express
IMPHAL, Mar 25: A division bench of the gauhati High Court today directed the Union of india and the Assam Rifles authorities to pay Rs 4 lakhs as compensation for the killing of one Khundrakpam Tejkumar alias Gandharva Singh s/o Kh Shanti Singh of uripok Laikhurembi Leikai.
After arrest by a team of the para-military force on March 9, 2004 Tejkumar was found killed in the subsequent days.
On the initiation of the Human Rights Law network a writ petition was filed in the Gauhati High and the Division Bench comprising of Justices Tayenjam Nandakumar and Mutum Binoykumar passed the verdict for compensating the victim’s mother with the said amount within four months.
According to case dossiers, the then 22 years old Kh Tejkumar was picked up from a local yaoshang sports meet venue on the third day of the festival (March 9, 2004) by personnel of 19 Assam Rifles stationed at the Yainganpokpi post and was brutally tortured and killed in their custody.
On the otherhand, the AR contended that Tejkumar was killed in an encounter with the AR personnel and that the individual was apprehended pursuant to a confirmed report and intercepts and consequent snatch operations, having been identified as a cadre of PREPAK by a highly reliable source, a statement issued by Human Rights Law Network recounted the case records.
As per contention of the AR, Tejkumar led the troops to many places including Singjamei, kakwa, Thang-meiband etc and finally to a spot near NG mani College, Chairenthong (Khurai) from where a gunny bag was dug out and fired from the weapon previously concealed inside the gunny bag. While opening fire and trying to escape taking advantage of the darkness, the AR team was compelled to retaliate consequently killing Tejkumar, the Network statement added.
As the matter was intimated to the Gauhati HC leading to directive for an inquiry the then Additional District Judge (manipur West) Kh Gomti Devi consequently submitted a report on May 31, 2008 wherein it was mentioned that Tejkumar was brutally tortured and killed in the custody of the 19 Assam Rifles. At the time of passing the verdict, the Court made it clear that the compensation amount is in addition to the other remedies admissible to the petitioner in the course of the law by way of damage in civil suit and other remedies in criminal proceedings against the worng doers, the Networks’ director Meihoubam Rakesh, who is also the counsel for the petitioner, added in the statement.