Witoubou Newmai
It is an unsettling experience to peruse various press statements from Naga organisations in Nagaland based newspapers these days. Unsettling because, the intent of many press statements goes against the spirit of Naga reconciliation and the desire for peace. In short, often these statements are infused with the “Tom and Jerry Syndrome” of the cartoon series, where outdoing the other defines the whole affair.
It is sooner the better for the Naga organizations and leaders to realize that their much vaunted press statements and activities impair the collective Naga progression. They should also realise that today’s common Naga men and women have the capacity to read things between the lines. One is only inviting a catastrophic situation if the serenity maintained by the Naga public is misunderstood as ‘un-dissenting’.
Any organization not able to exhibit the elements of 'guardianship' but finds vigour and security in employing the bullying approach is driven by insecurity complex and vested interests. The connotation is that, an organization that suffers from insecurity and overwhelmed by vested interests can never be a responsible organization. If any organization is genuinely working for the cause it will not choose media as a parroting platform against kin organisations. The spirit of reconciliation and genuineness of one’s intention are two sides of the same coin. If these qualities are ingrained in any organization then scoring brownie points through the media becomes unimportant.
One should learn that, to make the media as the only ‘connect’ for communication is a concomitant of the continuing practice of ‘untouchability’ among the Naga organizations which is unbecoming of them who are supposed to be leading a people’s movement. It is every common Naga’s desire for the various Naga organizations and leaders to be responsible towards the collective aspiration the Naga people have been fighting for.
It is quite pathetic that, many Naga organizations continue to employ coercion and muscle flexing complete with ‘warnings’ and ‘cautions’ instead of choosing to rely on sound articulation and innovation.
Not being able to value certain universal ideals by the Naga organizations is another big issue and hence they fail to see a clear notion about what the society needs. The credibility of a responsible organization and leaders lies in facing the reality and acting responsibly in the face of the problems. The Naga case, haunted and hobbled by Naga organisations’ own creations, has given room for growing antagonism.
It is high time the Naga organizations discard the practice of ‘untouchability’ among them. As much as possible they should also avoid the media as a platform to ‘advise’ other kin organisations. Instead, adopting the policy of ‘goodwill mission’ to reach out to each other as the basic frame for sorting out misunderstandings, Naga society can neutralize the whole antagonism. In this way, Naga society can insistently reject any expression of tribalism and interests.
