[Previous entry: "NSCN-IM refutes Indian intelligence reports Source: Hueiyen News Service / Newmai News Network"] [Next entry: "Myanmar split in Naga group NISHIT DHOLABHAI The Telegraph"]

06/08/2011: "Chairman S.S Khaplang Impeached & Expelled by GPRN/NSCN National Assembly"

Chairman S.S Khaplang Impeached & Expelled by GPRN/NSCN National Assembly

“No one is above the Nation; No one is above the National Yehzabo” is boldly written on the front page of the NSCN constitution. The emergency session of the National Tatar Hoho was convened today at the Oking, GPRN/NSCN, to deliberate on the unceremonious and unconstitutional action of Chairman S.S Khaplang who, without the consent and approval of the National Assembly, removed one of the senior most freedom fighters in South East Asia and widely respected Naga political figure Gen. Khole Konyak, Commander-in-Chief of the Naga Army. Chairman S.S Khaplang’s haphazardous dismissal of a revered Collective Leader and also unilaterally filling up the vacant post of Vice Chairmanship in the NSCN, widely regarded as undeclared position held by Gen. Khole Konyak, was outrightly rejected by the August assembly. The arbitrary action of the Chairman, who also ordered non-participation of GPRN/NSCN in the Naga political Groups meeting of 18th September 2010 and all subsequent Naga Reconciliation meetings was thoroughly discussed by the National Assembly. He not only hampered FNR’s efforts to bring peace and reconciliation in Naga homeland but also remained non-committal on all the burning issues owing to his self-exiled nature of existence for more than ten years. The dictatorial and remote controlled type of administration, overruling even National Hoho resolutions of Nov. 2009 and other important national programmes was condemned by the national Assembly.
The highly undemocratic and unconstitutional governance over the years clearly contradicted the National Yehzabo and placed the Naga Nation at a perilous path. A decisive hour was deemed necessary for which the impeachment proceeding against Chairman S.S Khaplang was put in motion by speaker of the National Tatar Hoho. Every single member of the August house with raised right hand demanded expulsion and impeachment of Mr. S.S Khaplang, Chairman of the NSCN party and President of the People’s Republic of Nagaland. The Assembly also witnessed nineteen Regional Chairmen and representatives of different regions in Naga homeland appending their signatures supporting impeachment of Mr. S.S Khaplang for wilful violation of the National Yehzabo. As per the democratic norms and as empowered by the National Yehzabo, the Speaker of the Tatar Hoho, Hevukhu Yeptho, pronounced the verdict of the Naga people. The position and status of a reclusive yet dictatorial Naga Leader S.S Khaplang has, therefore, been decisively shut out by the Naga people. The historic moment was witnessed by both the old and new generation Naga freedom fighters with a strong sense of justice and renewed commitment towards resolving issues confronting GPRN/NSCN in particular and Naga people in general.
MIP,
GPRN/NSCN.

*Tatar Hoho Statement is given below.

GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF NAGALAND
Office of the Speaker
National Tatar Hoho
RESOLUTION OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ON 7TH JUNE 2011 AT OKING, COUNCIL HEAD QUARTERS KHEHOI DESIGNATED CAMP

IMPEACHMENT AHZA
Consequent upon the breach of National Yehzabo of the Government of the People’s Republic of Nagaland PART II, Article 1. Party Discipline, DISCIPLINE OF THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST COUNCIL OF NAGALAND Clause 1., Party Discipline Clause 3., 4, 5 & 7., PART II, Article 3., PART III, Article 3. Clause (a), PART IV Article 3., Clause (a), PART IV Article 3., Clause (a), Party Discipline under D-ANTI SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Clause 2. and Party Discipline, Clause 6., PART III, Article 3. Clause (a), PART IV Article 3., Clause (a), Party Discipline, Clause 6. In upholding the National Yehzabo and in exercise of PART II, Article 3. IMPEACHMENT OF THE COUNCIL LEADERSHIP, the National Assembly unanimously impeach Mr. S. S. Khaplang from the Chairmanship/President-ship of the GPRN/NSCN on this day the 7th June 2011.
In implementation of the National Yehzabo Part III, Article 4. Gen. Kholi Konyak, Commander-in-Chief, Naga Army is hereby unanimously nominated by the National Assembly as the Acting President of the Government of the People’s Republic of Nagaland/Acting Chairman of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland.

(HEVUKHU) Speaker National assembly GPRN/NSCN

Rebel Naga group ousts its chief By IANS,
Dimapur (Nagaland) : One of northeast India's influential and oldest tribal separatist group National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN) has split with the group's chief expelled from the outfit for alleged 'autocratic' style of functioning.
A meeting of the self-styled members of parliament of the NSCN at their mobile headquarters near Dimapur, Nagaland's commercial hub, first removed the septuagenarian chairman S.S. Khaplang and later expelled him from the outfit.
The decision to expel Khaplang came days after he removed the outfit's self-styled commander-in-chief 'general' Khole Konyak from his post.
"The meeting deliberated on the unceremonious and unconstitutional action of chairman S.S. Khaplang who, without the consent and approval of the 'national assembly', removed one of the senior-most freedom fighters in South East Asia and a widely respected Naga political figure 'general', Khole Konyak, commander-in-chief of the Naga army (the outfit's armed wing)," an NSCN statement said.
"Every single member of the august house with raised right hand demanded expulsion and impeachment of S.S. Khaplang. And finally he was expelled."
Konyak was nominated as the acting chairman of the NSCN.
The NSCN had split into two factions in 1988 following ideological differences.
The two NSCN groups, one led by guerrilla leaders Isak Chishi Swu and Thuingaleng Muivah (NSCN-IM), and the other faction, until recently headed by S.S. Khaplang (NSCN-Khaplang), have been engaged in a bitter turf war for territorial supremacy with an estimated 500 cadres killed in the past decade.
The two factions are also operating a ceasefire with New Delhi - the NSCN-IM is currently holding talks with the Indian government after entering into a truce in 1997.
The Khaplang faction of the NSCN is yet to begin formal peace talks although it entered into a ceasefire in 2001.
Khaplang, since the NSCN split in 1988, was operating out of Myanmar and never visited Nagaland.
• Share
NSCN leader Khaplang expelled from his own faction Samudra Gupta Kashyap Express India

Guwahati The Khaplang faction of the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (NSCN) has expelled its own founder chairman SS Khaplang from its top post, after holding him guilty of removing the outfit’s armed wing chief, apart from filling up another top post without consultation with its “general assembly.”
The decision to remove Khaplang, a Hemi Naga originally from Myanmar, was taken at an emergency session of the 'National Tatar Hoho' (the 'National Assembly' of the outfit’s underground government called 'Government of the People’s Republic of Nagalim') held at Oking on Monday, a press release issued by the outfit’s publicity wing at Dimapur, on Tuesday night said.
Khaplang had reportedly removed self-styled General Khole Konyak from the post of “Commander-in-Chief” of the Naga Army apart from unilaterally filling up the vacant post of vice-chairmanship in the NSCN, widely regarded as undeclared position held by General Konyak without taking the 'National Assembly' into confidence, the press release said.
Khaplang, who had originally founded the NSCN along with Thuingaleng Muivah in the wake of the signing of the Shillong Accord of 1975 by a section of Naga underground leaders, had later split to form his own faction (NSCN-K) in 1988. Interestingly, though his faction has been in a ceasefire with the Government of India since 2001, not a single round of peace talks has been held between the government and the faction till date.
Nagaland Congress explains stand on Naga political issue
Font size:
Media Cell, NPCC

As the two opposing political parties, the Congress and the NPF have nothing in common as far as the political ideologies and principles are concerned. However, on Naga political issue, it appears that despite having formed the Joint Legislators’ Forum (JLF), the NPF has either a hidden agenda or it is trying to impose its perspective on the Congress. Else, there was no reason as to why both the Chief Minister and the Home Minister should talk about NPF and Congress of having different perspective and agenda on Naga political issue. Wasn’t the objective of forming the JLF on Naga political issue to remove such differences and find a common ground?
Let the Home Minister Shri. Imkong L. Imchen clarify as to whether he is a Cabinet Minister under the terms of 16-point agreement or outside of it. As an elected member, by stating that he was happy with the statehood yet, not satisfied with the present constitutional arrangement, he had openly rejected the Statehood. The Home Minister had violated his oath of secrecy taken under the Constitution of India and hence lost the moral right to continue not only as the Cabinet Minister but also as the Member of Legislative Assembly. Should the Chief Minister fail to remove him, the NPCC demands that His Excellency, the Governor takes cognizance of his outspoken anti-constitutional ideology and advise the Chief Minister for his removal.
The Home Minister should know that all the sixty elected members, irrespective of whether they belong to NPF, Congress or other political parties had pledged under oath of secrecy to bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India. All the Nagas, including those underground group(s) who had involved themselves in the State elections overtly or covertly have become part and partial of the Nagaland State politics under the constitution of India.
The question of the Home Minister as to whether the Congress is satisfied with the 16-point agreement and whether it was a final solution for the Congress, was a death trap question not for the NPCC but for the Nagas in general. It is left to the wisdom of the Nagas as to whether we should pursue our aspiration intelligently or allow him to mess up and destroy what we hold dear to us. For the understanding of people like him, 16-point agreement was not an end in itself but it is a means to all future hopes. The following reasons support this conclusion.
(1) A close look into clauses (13) and (14) of the 16-point agreement emphatically provided to that effect.
(2) The Nagaland Legislative Assembly (NLA) had unanimously passed 5 successive resolutions under the Chief Ministerships of Late P. Shilu Ao, Late Dr. Hokishe Sema, Late Vamuzo, Dr. S.C. Jamir and Neiphiu Rio to implement these clauses.
(3) The recognition of Naga problem as a political problem by the then PM Late Shri. P.V. Narasimharao.
(4) The ceasefire agreement between the GoI and the Naga political groups and the ongoing dialogue.
The NPCC reiterates that it is no longer relevant to draw a parallel between the 16-point agreement and the Bedrock of Naga Society. It was categorically stated by the Congress in presence of all Nagas at Kohima local ground on August 31, 2005 that Bedrock of Naga Society was a closed chapter. The NPF had not raised any objection or demanded explanation from the Congress on that day. The Naga people including the NPF had accepted the Congress’ public declaration. This amply proved that the chapter was closed. It is no longer an issue to the NPCC.
The NPF has been questioning the NPCC of its achievements in Naga political issue. The Congress in all humility announces to the Naga public that it has the following achievements to its credit and record.
(1) Naga Peoples’ Convention (NPC), the front-runner of Nagaland Nationalist Organization (NNO) and the Congress brought about Statehood in 1960 by signing the 16-point agreement with the GoI.
(2). Ceasefire agreement between the GoI and Federal Government of Nagaland (FGN) was signed during the NNO (the front runner of Congress) Govt. in Nagaland and Congress Govt. in Delhi in September 1964.
(3). It was the prayer of NPCC to former Prime Minister of India, Late Rajiv Gandhi to offer “Talk without pre-condition” to the Naga political groups. On 19th May 1991 two days before he was assassinated in Sriperumpudur in Tamil Nadu, he committed to the Nagas at Dimapur local ground to talk without pre-condition if voted to power. After his death when the Congress was voted to power, the Congress in 1991 under the leadership of Dr. S. C. Jamir as the Chief Minister persuaded the then Prime Minister Late P.V. Narasimharao to offer talk without pre-condition. On 22nd February 1996, he landed in Naga soil at Dimapur and offered “talk without pre-condition”. He recognized the Naga problem as political problem that needed political solution. It opened a new dimension in Naga political issue and brought it to the right perspective.
(4) It was under Congress Govt. in Nagaland under the Chief Ministership of Dr. S.C. Jamir that on 25th July 1997, ceasefire was announced which became effective from 1st August 1997.
(5) Talk without pre-condition with NSCN (IM) was brought to the Ministerial level in UPA-I which was led by Shri. Oscar Fernandez, the then Union Minister.
What is the achievement of the Regional party under the names and style of Democratic Party (DP), United Democratic Front (UDF), Naga National Democratic Party (NNDP), Nagaland People’s Council (NPC) and Naga Peoples’ Front (NPF)? The only contribution of the regional party was the Shillong Accord signed on 11th November 1975. The UDF (the front-runner of NPF) in 1977 State general election in its manifesto had proudly claimed Shillong Accord as its achievement. The Regional party was even afraid to disown the terms of Shillong Accord. Shillong Accord sharply divided the Nagas and became the mother of all fratricidal killings.
The big difference between the NPF and Congress is that, while the NPF is stuck to the past, the Congress had risen to the call of circumstances in situation and gave new impetus to the Naga political issue at different stages of our struggle for freedom.
The NPF is responsible for making Nagaland and Nagas enemy of all neighboring States. Our relationship with our neighbors could not have been worse than the present one. The NPF’s policy for integration has been too provocative to our neighbors that are doing more harm than good to Nagas living in neighboring States. The NPF’s provocative approach has closed all diplomatic channels with our neighbors. What steps had NPF taken to win over the confidence of our neighboring States? Nothing, except fomenting more and more troubles so much so that NPF is now branded as the trouble maker in the whole of Northeast.
NPF is anti-Nagaland. It was under the leadership of Imkong L. Imchen as Minister of Education that affiliation was granted under NBSE to the private schools in the four hill districts of Manipur in 2006 against the wishes and interest of the Nagas of Nagaland. The NPF-led DAN Govt. exploited the backward tribes in employment, contract and supplies, other development activities so much so that it finally forced the ENPO to demand for a separate State. The Chief Minister was responsible for mishandling the issue in its nascent stage.
The Congress party’s consistent stand has been that, it will welcome any solution greater and better than the present arrangement, the Statehood. The Congress party stands for unity of the Nagas. It will remain steadfast in its commitment to find an honorable and lasting political solution acceptable to all the Naga political groups and the Nagas in general.

Media Cell, NPCC

FGN on death of NSCN cadre morungexpress
Dimapur, (MExN): The FGN today asserted that the one NSCN/GRPN cadre reported to have been killed earlier, has “died in custody of the Naga army.” The cadre, one Nechizo of Thehephu village in Phek district was a “’deserter’ who had breached the federal army code of conduct by deserting his duties five times consecutively,” a note from the FGN’s “rali-wali” stated. “Consequent to his fourth escapade, eno Nechizo was arrested by the Naga army and brought to his native village where an agreement was made in presence of village elders, his kiths and kins and Naga army officers of federal government of Nagaland,” stated the note from G Zhimomi, “joint secretary to the federal government of Nagaland.” The “agreement” was that “if eno Nechizo deserts his duties further thereby endangering and breaching the trust of his fellow cadres, the village elders and his families shall/ will not have say or responsibility in his trail in the course of action levied on him…” The said Nechizo “deserted his duties” for the fifth time and defected to the NSCN/GPRN along with arms for which he was apprehended by the “Naga army where he died in custody of the Naga army,” the group claimed. The FGN note however stated that “at this juncture of Naga political peace reconciliation, the government condemns the unfortunate death of Eno Nechizo whilst in the Naga army custody. It should be noted that appropriate justice will be served if any foul play is involved.”

Crackdown on ‘tax’ collection - Nagaland home minister calls meet to address problem The telegraph OUR CORRESPONDENT
Kohima, June 6: The Nagaland government today vowed to crack down on collection of illegal taxes by departments and different organisations.
Home minister, Imkong L. Imchen, said the state government would leave no stone unturned to crack down on illegal collection of taxes.
Imchen warned of action against those who indulge in illegal collection of money and asked the law enforcing agencies and the departments concerned to pull up their socks to check the menace. He said the collection of money was nothing short of “extortion” which needed to be curbed by taking remedial steps.
The state government today convened a high-level meeting of state officials headed by Imchen to take stock of the situation.
Imchen, chief secretary Lalthara and home commissioner J. Alam today suggested several measures and asked the agencies concerned to take adequate steps.
Apart from Naga militant groups and other Northeast insurgent outfits operating from Dimapur, several government departments, organisations and police have been collecting so-called taxes by erecting gates, violating orders issued by the government.
Imchen admitted that police personnel and officers manning the checkgates were the main culprits.
“I do not deny that my personnel and officers are collecting money from the people,” Imchen said.
He said except inter-state checkgates, no one is allowed to erect gates and collect money. Within the state there are dozens of gates collecting enter and exit taxes from the vehicles which has been declared illegal by the government but no measures have been taken to check the defaulters.
Imchen suggested involvement of Naga apex organisations like the Naga Hoho, Naga Students’ Federation, Eastern Nagaland People’s Organisation and the Eastern Nagaland Students’ Federation in checking the menace of collections.
The minister urged the district administration and department officials to be prompt in checking illegal collections.
Today’s meeting also agreed to open a vigilance cell in the departments to check illegal collections. Commissioner and secretary, PWD, Temjen Toy, said the gates were been illegally erected on national highways by some departments and organisations.
The Nagaland Voluntary Consumer Organisation in a representation to the home minister has urged the state government to immediately look into the matter.
Naga govt wakes up to 'tax' menace Times of India TNN
DIMAPUR: A high-level meeting, presided over by state home minister Imkong Imchen, has discussed the problem of rampant illegal tax collections from vehicles on national and state highways in Nagaland.
On Monday, Imchen said the state government would take all possible measures to check illegal collection pf taxes in the state.
Stating that illegal taxation has taken a toll on lives of common people, the minister warned of befitting actions against those who are indulged in collections and asked the law enforcing agencies and the concerned departments to pull up their socks to check the menace of illegal taxation.

Policy of the Indian State, Nagalim and Human Rights Dr.Amit Bhattacharyya Professor, Department of History,
Jadavpur University, Kolkata

In this paper, we propose to study the policy of the Indian state towards small nationalities, particularly the Naga people. It is the story of broken promises, opposition to the rights of nationalities to self-determination and human rights, and the most savage persecution of people who have dared to be free. Such a policy was in conformity with the policy of creating a strong central government. The policy of creating a strong centre was linked up with the ambitions of the Indian ruling classes to become a big power—a super-power. It betrayed a ‘Great Power’ syndrome on the part of the Indian ruling classes and their political representatives.

We propose to divide our discussion into three parts. First, the ‘Great Power’ syndrome as manifested in the writings of Jawaharlal Nehru at a time when he himself was in British prison. Second, various articles of the Constitution of India that trample underfoot the rights of various nationalities as it does the rights of individuals. Third, the case of Nagalim or Nagaland—a case of broken promises and war waged by the Indian State against the Naga people.

The ‘Great Power’ syndrome

As the Second World War drew to a close, the Indian big bourgeoisie saw rosy visions of its future. As there was hardly any control over prices of goods, they made very high profits. On the other hand, in Asia, the end of the war saw the defeat of Japan, decline in the might of France and the Netherlands and the prospect of a bitter civil war in China. They came to cherish ambitions to dominate not only South Asia but the entire Indian Ocean region.

In fact, it was Jawaharlal Nehru who gave voice to their aspirations. However surprising it might seem, he was a bitter opponent to the right of nations to self-determination. While being lodged in the Ahmedabad fort prison, he wrote: “Whether India is properly to be described as a nation or two, or more really does not matter, for the modern idea of nationality has been almost totally divorced from statehood. The national state is too small a unit today and small states can have no independent existence”.1 He again held: “…the small national state is doomed. It may survive as a cultural, autonomous area but not as an independent political unit”.2

Elsewhere he remarked: “The right of any well-constituted area to secede from the Indian federation or union has often been put forward and the argument of the USSR advanced in support of it. That argument has little application, for conditions there are wholly different and the right has little practical value”.3

The future prime minister of India betrayed his big-power chauvinistic thinking when he held that it was India’s “manifest destiny” to become the centre of a “super-national state” stretching from the Middle East to South-East Asia and to exercise “an important influence” in the Pacific region”.4 Nehru affirmed: “So it seems that in the modern world it is inevitable for India to be the centre of things in Asia(In that term, I would include Australia and New Zealand too, being in the Indian Ocean region, East Africa comes into it also)…India is going to be the centre of a very big federation…”.5 Referring to the bygone days when India ruled over various countries of Asia and its culture spread far a wide, Nehru affirmed that “India is likely to dominate politically and economically the Indian Ocean region”.6 In August 1945, he held: “I stand for a south Asia federation of India, Iraq, Iran, Afganistan and Burma…”; then he quite arrogantly declared: “In the world of today there are two big powers, Russia and America. In the world of tomorrow, there will be two more, India and China—there will be no fifth”.7

Although Nehru was the main spokesman of the Indian big bourgeoisie, he was not alone in being afflicted with this ‘great power’ syndrome. Vallabhbhai Patel, too, harboured such wild aspirations. He said: “Let India be strong and able to assume the leadership of Asia, which is its right”.8 Gandhi desired that Hindustani should “become the language of the whole of Asia”.9

That was not all. Nehru considered Ceylon to be “really part of India” and wanted her to be “an autonomous unit of the Indian federation”.10 He claimed that Nepal was “certainly a part of India”, though she was a nominally independent country.11

Such was the attitude of the future prime minister of India, i.e, subjugation of small nationalities and bringing them forcibly within centralized Indian union. The future of small nationalities as independent political units was thus doomed. There are many such cases. We, however, will take up one of many of those—the case of Nagalim. But before that, we take up the various Articles of the Constitution.

Articles of the Constitution

The Constitution of India tramples underfoot the rights of the various nations of this subcontinent as it does the rights of the individuals. There are, besides others, Article 19, Clauses 2,3 and 4; Article 22, Clause 3(b); Articles 352 to 360; various legislations which, empowered by the Constitution, the state has enacted and which ensure that a citizen can enjoy his democratic rights only at the pleasure of the executive). Under the Constitution, the indivisibility of the Indian Union cannot be questioned; that is, the demand for the right of self-determination including the right of cessation has been made illegal. Even no bill seeking territorial changes of a constituent state can be “introduced in either House of parliament except on the recommendation of the Parliament”. The Governor of a state is not elected by its people but appointed by the President(i.e, the central government) and holds “office during the pleasure of the President”.

When the method of selecting State governors was debated in the Constituent assembly, Nehru was emphatic that they should be nominated by the central government because, as he said, “we should always view things from the context of preserving the unity, the stability and security of India”.12

There are provisions in the Constitution which confer absolute power on the President who is elected through a very indirect process and on the basis of extremely limited franchise. The emergency provisions—Articles 352 to 360 have, according to Sarat Chandra Bose, “a remarkable family likeness to Sections 42, 43 and 45 of the GOI Act of 1935, the quintessence of which is reincarnated in our Constitution with a minimum of verbal changes”.13

The Armed Forces(Special Powers) Act, 1958(as amended in 1972) confers on the Armed Force, special powers in “disturbed” areas. It is the prerogative not of the ministers but of the governors of a state, the administrator of a union territory or the central government, to declare an area “disturbed”. When an area is declared as “disturbed”, the state legislature has no jurisdiction over it. The Act empowers any armed forces officer or any person of equivalent rank that he may, if he may consider necessary, fire upon or otherwise use force, even to the causing of death of persons not only disobeying any law, but also disobeying orders prohibiting the assembly of five or more persons and those carrying weapons…The Act also permits the military personnel to destroy any shelter from which, in their opinion, armed attacks are likely to be made. The Act also allows the arrest without a warrant, with “whatever force as may be necessary”, of any person against whom “a reasonable suspicion” exists that he is “about to commit a cognizable offence”.14 And the armed forces, by virtue of enjoying such autocratic powers, enjoy complete immunity from any punishment whatsoever. They can torture, rape and even murder any person on mere suspicion. One can still recollect the case of the rape and murder and Thangjam Monorama, the Manipuri girl by the Indian Army some years back which snowballed into a powerful mass movement leading to the self-immolation of Pebam Chittaranjan and the novel way of nude protest as shown by the Manipuri mothers.

What the people describe as “armies of opposition” have been stationed in the north-east and the in J & K for a long time and a bitter, undeclared war has been going on against the nationalities fighting to be free. Irom Sharmila Chhanu, a college girl of Manipur, has been continuing an epic hunger strike from November 2001 demanding the withdrawal of the Act of 1958.

In fact, the Indian bourgeoisie, which flourished as intermediaries of British capital, were keen on having a unitary Indian state with a strong centre by controlling which they would be able to establish their sway over different national regions and curb the forces of genuine nationalism. Moreover, they aspired to become a zonal power in the Indian Ocean region as junior partners of Anglo-American powers.

Case of Nagalim

The land of the Nagas or Nagalim is a land of proud and free people who never succumbed to the domination of external forces. They have had their history of free existence from time immemorial. They live in parts of Burma and the present-day Indian sub-continent. Despite attempts by the British raj, larger portions of the Naga territories could never be conquered and were termed as “excluded areas” or “un-administered areas”. In 1929, before the Simon Commission, the Nagas demanded restoration of their independence when the British withdrew from India and Burma.

A memorandum was submitted again to the British Cabinet Mission on 9 April 1946, clearly stating that the Naga future would never be bound by any arbitrary decision of the British government and that no recommendation would be acceptable without consultation.15

In June 1947, the Governor of Assam, Sir Akbar Hydari, acting on behalf of the Indian Constituent Assembly, negotiated an agreement with the Naga National Council(NNC) in meetings held on 27,28 and 29 June 1947 in Kohima. That agreement is known as the Nine-point Agreement. According to that agreement, the Nagas had to control their affairs for a period of 10 years at the end of which the Nagas should be asked to decide whether to join India or to be free to determine their own future.16

However, after a few weeks of signing the agreement, to the dismay of the Nagas, one evening Sir Akbar Hydari warned several Nagas that if the Naga Hills District refused to join the Indian Union, India would use her force against them. This is a clear case of broken promises.17

A Naga delegation then went to the Bhangi colony in Delhi on 19 July 1947 to tell Gandhiji that they had resolved to declare their independence a day before India would do so, on 14 August 1947 and to ask him for help. Gandhiji told the delegation: “Nagas have every right to be independent. We did not want to live under the domination of the British and they are now leaving us…I do not believe in forced unions…If you do not wish to join the Union of India, nobody will force you to do that. The Congress government will not do that”.18 When the Naga delegates pointed out that Sir Akbar Hydari was threatening to do exactly that, Gandhiji exclaimed: “Sir Akbar is wrong. He cannot do that…”.19

But Jawaharlal Nehru definitely did have other considerations in his mind—considerations quite in conformity with the policy he had been championing throughout this period. Regarding Nagalim, he wrote: “It(the Naga territory lies between two huge countries, India and China…Inevitably, therefore, this Naga territory must form part of India and Assam…the excluded areas should be incorporated with the other areas”.20 In fact, the big-power chauvinism or expansionist aims of the Indian ruling classes would not allow the Nagas to take their destiny in their own hands after the withdrawal of the British. They, in fact, wanted to annex the whole of the Naga territory.

Meanwhile, the NNC held a plebiscite which began on 16 May 1951 in Kohima on the issue of the future of the Naga people. About 99.9% of the Naga people voted in favour of remaining independent.21

On 7 August 1951, Nehru’s principal private secretary wrote to A.Z.Phizo, the leader of the NNC, that the Indian government would not allow any attempt by any section of the people of India to claim an independent state.22 This, needless to say, was a political ‘justification’ which can never be justified by any standard of national or human rights. The Nehrus used this plea to defend their annexation of the Naga territory even though the Nagas had never been a section of the people of India.

The United Nations Charter’s preamble proclaims that the UN will try to save surrounding generations from the scourge of war and will “reaffirm faith in the fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small…”23 Article of the Charter sets out the aims of the UN as being “To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples…”24. There are many other things as well which clearly show that India’s actions are totally at variance with UN declarations.

Thus the struggle started, the struggle waged by a free people who refused to be enslaved. On 18 October 1952, Mr.Zasibito of Jotsoma village was shot dead by a sub-inspector of the Indian police force. The barbarity committed by the Indian armed forces beggars description—genocide, rape, cutting of limbs into pieces, destruction of buildings by aerial bombardment, not to speak of the day-today humiliation and other forms of brutality perpetrated by the Indian security forces. During the period of eight years from 1956 to 1964, there were about 1,50,000 casualties on the side of the Nagas—mostly civilian.

Instances of torture and state-sponsored brutality25

The brutality perpetrated by the Indian armed forces against a free people who refused to be cowed down will put to shame all human beings and will make a mockery of democracy that this Indian State boasts of. Some of these are as follows: execution in public, mass rape, deforming sex organs, mutilating limbs and body, electric shocks, puncturing eyes, hanging people upside down, putting people in smoke-filled rooms, burning down of villages, granaries and crops, concentration camps, forced starvation and labour and many more. An old lady, Dzuviu of Kohima village narrated in tears how a girl from the Lotha area was raped and then hanged upside down, after which sticks were thrust into her private parts. Her hands and legs were severed. These acts of brutality were done in front of villagers who hand been rounded up by the Indian army to teach them a lesson. That reminds one of the similar acts done by the Japanese imperialists in China as has been narrated by Iris Chang in her book The Rape of Nanking. This act of bestiality was equaled by another in which a pregnant woman was dragged around and thus the foetus came out which the soldiers put in her mouth. In 1962, at Matikhru village of Phek district, the Indian army rounded up all the adult male members and after torturing them for hours took them into the village chief’s house where their heads were chopped off. In May 1979, the Angami Women’s Welfare Association and some other organizations submitted a memorandum to the then chief minister of Nagaland, parts of which read as follows: “They(BSF) chase our innocent women who are working in their fields as well as on roads. They roam about our jungles. Their conducts as such are causing nuisance among the people and our women find no protection”. One can go on multiplying such instances.

Projection of the Nagas as ‘hostiles’, ‘savages’ ‘rebels’ etc.

The people of Nagalim have been projected as ‘hostiles’, ‘savages’, ‘blood-mongers’, ‘separatists’, ‘terrorists’ by the Indian state and sections of the media. Their struggle has been branded as ‘internal disturbances’.

The reality is that the Nagas were neither ‘secessionists’ nor ‘separatists’, but people fighting for their freedom. It is the Indian State which broke its promises and forcibly grabbed a piece of land that does not belong to it; and when the people, to whom that land legitimately belongs, raise the standard of resistance when all other avenues are sealed by the Indian State, the same State brand them as ‘terrorists’, hostiles’ or ‘secessionists’. How does the question of ‘secession’ come in when Nagalim was never part of India?

The Naga people have been the victims of all conceivable forms of savagery, hostility and brutality perpetrated by the Indian security forces. But did they commit brutality either to the Indians or to the captured Indian security forces? Facts will definitely reveal that the Nagas are far from what they have been projected to be. Let us cite a few instances furnished by the Nagas to establish what they truly are.

On 27 March 1956, 78 Indian police personnel were captured in an outpost attack at Satakha; they were released unharmed. On 26 August 1960, an Indian Air Force Dakota plane engaged in dropping arms and ammunition to the Indian troops at Bhor outpost was shot down. All the nine members of the crew were captured and later released. On 28 November 1986, Phek treasury convoy was immobilized and captured in an ambush. Every wounded captive was administered first aid and treated well. Thirty para-military personnel were pinned down at Kamjong post attack on 23 April 1987, and set free. On 10 July 1993, a para-military outpost(NAP) at Pughoboto was taken over without any casualty. All the 50 disarmed NAP personnel were set free unharmed.26

The Nagas can legitimately ask the question: “Are these acts or signs of savagery or terrorism? What is more, believe it or not, there is not a single case of an innocent Indian or Burmese civilian having been tortured or killed by the Nagas just because they are Burmese or Indian…”27

In 1997, a ten-year-ceasefire was made between the Indian government and the NSCN. That cease-fire, after the expiry of the term, was renewed in August 2007, this time for an indefinite period. Neither do we nor the people of Nagalim know how long this temporary peace would last and what lies in store for them in future. However, the people who place freedom above everything else and sincerely hold that is it the people and people alone who should have the last word, should firmly affirm that each nationality—big or small—should have the right to take the destiny of their own country in their own hands. After all, whatever might have happened to Vietnam later, that small country stills acts as the beacon light to all those who dare to be free.

References

1. Jawaharlal Nehru, Discovery of India, London 1956,p.545.
2. Ibid,p.550.
3. Ibid,p.548.
4. Ibid,p.550.
5. Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru, ed. By S.Gopal, vol.XV,p.562,566; see also ibid,p.123.
6. SW Nehru,XIV,p.161,325.
7. Ibid,pp.440,441-2; see also SWN,XIV,p.332.
8. P.D.Saggi, Life & Works of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Bombay,n.d,p.89.
9. CW Gandhi,LXXXVII,p.216.
10. SWN,XIV,p.450.
11. J.Nehru, Nehru’s Speeches 1949-53, Delhi 1957,pp.176-8.
12. Michael Brecher, Nehru: a Political Biography, London 1959,p.424.
13. Sarat Chandra Bose, ‘A Constitution of Myths and Denials’, in Sarat Chandra Bose Commemoration Volume, Calcutta 1982,p.427.
14. S.K.Ghosh, India’s Nationality Problems and Ruling classes. Published by the author, Calcutta January 1996, passim.
15. For details of earlier history, see Nagas are what Nagas were. A brochure printed at Dinapur and issued by Naga Mothers Association(NMA), Naga Students Federation(NSF) and Naga People’s Movement for Human Rights(NPMHR) on 14 August 2003.
16. See Free Nagalim Manifesto National Socialist Council of Nagalim, Oking 3rd edition, March 20,2007,p.37.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid,p.38.
19. Ibid.
20. SWN,XV,p.279.
21. Free Nagalim,p.44.
22. S.Gopal, J.Nehru II,p.208.
23. The legal Status of National Armed Resistance Right to Self-determination under International law & Why and how the Nagas are not Terrorists, Oking Publicity and Information Service, Government of the People’s Republic of Nagalim, January 2001.
24. Ibid.
25. ‘Human Rights Week in Nagaland 10-15 December, 1978: A Report’ in 25 Years of NPMHR Naga People’s Movement for Human Right Embracing Hope and Dreams, no place of publication, no date(2003?),pp.4-6. As the NPMHR was formed in 1978 and as this book was published on the occasion of the 25th year of its existence, so the year of this publication is likely to be 2003.
26. Free Nagalim,pp.53-54.
27. Ibid,p.55.
28.
Meet on Assam-Nagaland border issue Correspondent Assam Tribune
JORHAT, June 7 – A bilateral meet on the issue of the disputed Assam-Nagaland border areas will be held on June 10 at Mukokchang among the district administration authorities, top police officials and the forest department officials of both Jorhat and Mukokchang districts.
At the meeting, the Jorhat district administration is supposed to inform about the latest encroachment and illegal constructions by the Nagas inside the disputed Assam-Nagaland border. The officials of the district administrations of both the districts will discuss the perpetual border-related problems, particularly in the reserve forest land of the bordering areas of Jorhat district.
Though this kind of bilateral talks were organized time to time earlier and the officials of both the states had visited the inter-state border, no permanent solution has been derived as yet. The decision of maintaining status quo in the inter-state border areas has in fact ruined Assam rather than its neighbouring state Nagaland. The decision of such meetings is abided by Assam only. On the contrary, Nagaland has been carrying on encroachment in the three reserve forests of the Assam land since 2009. A delegation of high-level forest department officials visited the encroached areas inside the three reserve forest of Jorhat district, namely, Dissoi, Dissoi Valley and Tiru Hills and submitted a report to Jorhat Deputy Commissioner recently. Jorhat DC is supposed to present this report at the meet at Mokakchung on June 10, sources revealed.