There is a Russian proverb which says: “Dwell on the past and you’ll lose an eye; forget the past and you’ll lose both eyes.” This insight possibly best illustrates the dilemma that confronts the choices we make when it comes to engaging our past. It is quite evident that that we can either choose to address our history – no matter how pleasant or unpleasant it may be – in a healthy and positive way, or we can choose to pretend to forget it and by denying it, we unwittingly allow ourselves to be taken further away from the center of our being. In the final analysis, the most fundamental question at hand is, what do we do with our history; and how do we address it in a manner that will allow us to build a future of compassion and respect for one another?
Indeed the task of addressing our history is a painful task; but not to address it would only cause more pain and distortion of our humanity. Its no wonder that people of great faith have stated that “The struggle of people against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.” Therefore no human has the moral authority to say ‘Let bygones be bygones,’ after all common experience indicates that the past, far from disappearing or being forgotten, is embarrassingly persistent and will return and haunt us unless it has been dealt with adequately. Archbishop Tutu reminds us that unless we look the beast in the eye we will find that it returns to hold us hostage.
There is no doubt in my mind that we must begin to address the legacy of our history and create space to affirm and celebrate its positiveness while also acknowledging and correcting where it has gone wrong. It is therefore essential to address the burdens of our history in a meaningful and just manner. Hence, the questions of confession, apology, self-criticism and transformation should be defined in individual and collective terms with a sense of purpose, responsibility, dignity and compassion. Therefore, for the sake of the Naga future, the present Naga Reconciliation process must be given an opportunity to enable the Nagas to discern and reflect upon historical misgivings and to address them in a forward looking direction, so that a shared future can be build upon a common vision.
The journey towards reconciliation is process that does not happen in a linear fashion; in fact change takes place in a spiral manner – this means that the process moves forward in a to-and-fro motion. This technical aspect of the process is crucial for public understanding because, inability to grasp this reality will only dampen and slow down the process. It is here that the media, public and educational institutions take an active role in creating public awareness and in providing the democratic space for people to bring into public expression the issues that are fundamental towards the question of reconciliation.
While it is essential that these public institutions raise critical and crucial questions around reconciliation, it is equally important that they also help the public in understanding that the process involves both a backward and forward movement; but one that will eventually reach its objective as long as there is public participation and sincerity to the process. While the principal outcome of the reconciliation process depends on the willingness and sincerity of the core parties involved; the sustainability of the reconciliation process itself is largely dependent on the forms of intervention made by public institutions and the positions they take in enabling the parties and the process to move forward.
National Reconciliation is both an individual as well as a collective responsibility. Reconciliation is both an end as well as a means. And the process to address the burdens of our history requires courage and political will with a vision for a shared and respectful future, while making space for God to change hearts because the process of transformation is not reasonable – it needs something more than reason to evoke it – it needs grace, grace that comes from our Creator.
