The controversy surrounding land claims in and around the Intangki Reserved Forest refuses to die down with tribal units having a stake in the ongoing imbroglio taking up their respective stands. The State government—which has remained largely muted and incapacitated—and the NSCN (IM) now face the mounting task of resolving the claims and counter claims put before it by the respective tribal units. The question however arises as to whether the GPRN will be capable enough to satisfactorily resolve the problem and also at this juncture when its priority ought to be the peace process, whether it is doing the right thing by getting involved in ‘State’ issues. In this regard, an argument being put forward is that national workers, instead of taking the larger national agenda forward, are found to be busy meddling in too many social and other issues thereby creating many undesired situation and misunderstanding among different Naga communities and tribes.
Echoing a similar sentiment, the Tenyimi Central Union (TCU) representing ten tribal groups a few days ago took an equally significant resolution not to accept or allow any groups/factions to declare or convert any land anywhere in Tenyimi areas as national property or any other purpose without the consent of traditional land owner until such time as an acceptable and honorable political solution is arrived at. Whatever may be the validity behind such arguments, the public in general are under the impression that the Naga underground groups have the mandate to work out an honorable political settlement with the Government of India and that their political energy must be directed towards this goal rather than getting caught up in the vortex of everyday domestic issues, which may in fact do more harm than good to the ongoing peace process and also to the vital strength of the organization. Likewise, to take a cue, successive Chief Ministers of Nagaland have publicly stated on more than one occasion that they would be willing to step down once a political settlement comes about.
For the immediate though, what is of concern at this juncture is how the current land cauldron is leading to restlessness especially over the fluid situation arising from the emotionally charged up arguments on the question of land and the history behind ownership and inhabitation. Troubles which started as a land dispute between two or three village have now snowballed into a conflict involving multiple-tribal interests. Rather than leaving it to the GPRN, the State government will have to step in and try and resolve the matter either by setting up a relevant commission—to look into the entire gamut of issue including on the dispute along the Dimapur-Peren inter-district boundary—or to facilitate a people to people dialogue among the tribal units involved. Either way, the State government must not delay a settlement of the issue and more importantly clear the ambiguity surrounding the status of the Intangki area as a whole before the conflict spreads thereby threatening the very edifice of peaceful coexistence. In the meantime, in order to ensure peace and tranquility in the sensitive areas, the State government must issue the necessary ‘safety measures’ such as temporarily withdrawing all weapons with or without licenses available in possession of the villages located on both sides along the Intangki Reserved Forest.
