Preamble: “Nagas are not Indians, their territory is not a part of the Indian Union. We shall uphold and defend this unique truth at all costs and always”. Khrisanisa Seyie, First President, Federal Government of Nagaland.
As the true event unfolds, on arrival at the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) across the pacific from Hong Kong during October of 2014, the US immigration CBP officer (United States Customs and Border Protection) at the port-of-entry, while inspection confronted the writer, holder of Indian Passport. When he somberly uttered, “Will you remove your glasses?” Startled by the query, I bade him Sorry? What? Can you repeat please? “Remove your spectacles?” he resounded; and on compliance, the CBP officer looked straight into my eye and pronounced - “You are not an Indian, you are a Japanese”! The writer than had to convince and explain to the officer about the place known as Nagaland, a state in the North East of India. After successful elucidation the officer finally stamped the Indian Passport. Imaginably, the suspicion could be, of myself being an infiltrator from China or North Korea with a fake Indian Passport. The irony occurs to be the fact that the US CBP officer was from Hawaiian Island and was himself of a Japanese descent. Indeed, it is awkward for the ‘Nagas’ to accept ourselves as ‘Indians’ when the World cannot identify the Nagas as Indians. As a matter of fact, even the mainland Indians do not perceive the Nagas, including the population of the other 7 (seven) sister States of the North East India as their equal fellow citizens. Thus, my identity as a ‘Naga’ is more acceptable than being an ‘Indian’. So, what makes me a ‘Naga’ and who am I beyond a Naga? Predominantly, the ethnic feature - the physical appearance of a mongoloid, more than my cultural or traditional heritage makes me a ‘Naga’. Being a town bred, with hardly any cultural or traditional roots and deprived of village life - bluntly fits myself into a ‘kuccha Naga’ an unfinished product. Apart from being a ‘Naga’ I belong to the ‘Tetseo’ clan, from the very recently labelled ‘Chakhesang’ tribe, earlier known as ‘Eastern Angami’ branded by the British officials and anthropologists in the likes of J.H. Hutton and J.P. Mills. But before the advent of the British, was called as ‘Chokrimi’ a constituent of the larger group ‘Tenyiemi’ and prior to that, remains elusive on the ancestral detour from Burma ß Japan ß China ß Mongolia - proven by the shared practice of age-old wrestling tradition and so brandished a ‘Mongoloid’. Beyond that, stamped a ‘Homo sapiens’ in Latin, meaning ‘wise man/person’ or a human being, then finally leads to the obscurity between ‘spirit’ and ‘matter’. According to quantum physics, the first thing required for life is a variety of different atoms that can combine together to form a very large number of molecules, which differ greatly in their sizes, shapes and chemical properties. All of the living things on earth are made out of carbon compounds that are built with copious amounts of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen as well as traces of many other atoms. Just as the plants produce the oxygen we breathe, it is the stars that produced all the chemical elements out of which we (Human Beings), animals and plants are made.
Therefore to the postmortem question, Can I, a ‘Mongoloid Naga’ become a proud Indian? When the Indians are universally characterized with the Aryan/Dravidian racial groups. Yes, I presume, in a remote distant when the Indian society evolves to accept the Dalits, SC’s, ST’s and Adivasi’s as their equals (upper castes) on the same level playing field. Sets out to emulate the United States where American citizens across the race, creed or color - Red, White, Black, Brown and Yellow have all-embracing, accustomed tolerance to a large extent. Despite the fact that the Whites (European) had captured the land from the native Red Indians under duress. Similarly, apart from the native Dravidians, in the distant past, the Aryans arrived from the west and subjugated the natives of India; Dalits, SC’s, ST’s and Adivasi’s. Till the time when every race, creed or color inhabiting the Indian sub-continent are emancipated from the discriminatory psyche of the dominant Indian society over language, race, color, sex, political opinion, philosophical or religious belief, a ‘Naga’ cannot profess to become a proud ‘Indian’.
Historical Wrong; Scene – 1. Imperialism “The White Man’s Burden” till 1914:
After the Anglo-Burmese War in 1824-26 the British began to push into Naga territory. Between 1831 and 1924 eleven reserved forests were constituted and carved out from the forested areas of the Nagas in the foothills bordering Assam. Incursions into the Naga Hills (Angami portion) set off in 1832 led by Captain Jenkins and Pemberton followed by Lt. Gordon 1833, Grange in 1839, Bigges in 1840-44, Captain Butler in 1845-50 then Lt. Vincent in 1851 following the battle of Kikruma in 1851 led by Captain Reeds and later the battle of Khonoma in Nov, 1879 led by General Nations and Col. James Johnstone. The casualty on the British side between the years 1845-1865 was recorded to be 232 which was less than Nagas killed by British in Kikruma or Khonoma alone. Likewise, the incursions from Lotha, Ao and other territories ensued in carnages. Similarly, after 1823 the capture of territory began in the Naga Hills of Manipur led by British Officers Captain F. Grant, Lt. R.B. Pemberton, Major W. McCulloch along with Manupuri Raja Ghumbheer Sing with wanton bloodbath. The percentage of Nagas slaughtered stands much greater than all those slain by the British in the entire Indian sub-continent taken together. Hence, the British repressively occupied part of the Naga Territory.
Historical Wrong; Scene – 2. Colonial Era “WW-I and WW-II” till 1946:
The British Government in their pursuit of imperial and colonial interests, scrambling for economic, intellectual and territorial control was inevitable for conflicts and rivalry with the other Imperialists States. Obviously, war and military strategy became an instrument of national policy. Numerous wars had to be waged in different frontlines and to feed the war appetite, each Naga village were forced to provide fixed numbers of able-bodied men for war service, mostly in the labor corps. Hundreds of Naga lives were sacrificed fighting for the British Crown in the First World War of 1914-1918, when about 4000 Nagas including Nagas from Manipur were sent to fight in France and Mesopotamia during 1916-18. Likewise, during the Second World War of 1939-1945, Nagas were engaged as Scouts and then Defense Force and interposed in the fiercest battle of Kohima which held the Japanese advance. Thousands of Nagas died during the war and in the ensuing epidemic of dysentery. The British exploited and ravaged the Nagas.
Historical Wrong; Scene – 3. Post-Colonial Era “Sustained WMB” after 1947:
From 1956 to late 1980s the Indian Army, equipped with the Assam Police, Assam Rifles, 95 BSF, Garhwal Rifles, Gorkha Rifles, Madras Regiment, Maratha Regiment, Sikh Regiment to name a few. Armed with the Assam Maintenance of Public Order (Autonomous District) Act 1953, Assam Disturbance Areas Act 1955, the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act 1958, the regulation 5 of 1962 (The Nagaland Security Regulation 1962), a legacy of the British anti-colonial laws, directed its aggression to annihilate the Nagas which can only be compared with Hitler’s Nazi Germany. Uprooting the Nagas by village re-grouping - identical to concentration camps, tortures and rapes, massacres, destroying crops and burning down villages. Besides, the destruction of priceless antique art & artefacts in addition to physical property. It would be difficult to establish the exact number of men, women and children butchered by the Indian Army with the figures not less than 2,00,000 approximately 38.8 say 40% of the total population of Nagaland in 1960s, an indisputable case of genocide.
The struggle of colonized nations for self-determination leading to independence was the modern world’s mark of total rejection on the view of “civilized Europeans” entitlement to dominate and exploit the “uncivilized”. The old view of ‘White Man’s Burden’ continued to operate by India against the Naga’s through subtle hegemony, minority ruling over the majority via the Governor, Army, Para-military and the Security Forces with gross human rights violation.
The right to self-determination in international law “UN Charter: Art 1(2) & 55”:
Art 1(2) specifically, speaks of friendly relations, the principle of peoples’ equal rights and self-determination and universal peace. Art 55 is part of the chapter concerning international economic and social cooperation. However, “Self-determination” consists of two inherent contradictions, the conflicting faces of i) independence, territorial integrity, unity and the right to freedom from intervention and interference in the internal affairs of a State and ii) the very essence and the raison d’etre of “Peoples” right to determine their own destiny, where a people is not self-governing. In its duality, the principle of uti possidetis (“as you possess” in Latin) where, in the absence of an agreement simply “freezes” the colonial borders at the time of independence. And forbids fragmentation of sovereign States in the name of self-determination. Illustrated by the statement of Boutrous Boutrous-Ghali, former Secretary General of UN; “If every ethnic, religious or linguistic group claimed Statehood, there would be no limit to fragmentation, and peace, security and economic well-being for all would become ever more difficult to achieve. One requirement for solutions to these problems lies in commitment to human rights”.
Further, in the scope of rights’, a distinction is made between “People” and “Minority”. It is established in international law that the right to self-determination does not apply to minorities. Besides, the colonial aspect of the right to self-determination is considered to be obsolete in the sense that decolonization is considered over and done, with historical importance only.
However, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (GA Resolution 2625 (XXV), 1970), the Friendly Relations Declaration affirms and extends the right to self-determination to other areas. Thus, the right to self-determination no longer exclusively applies to non-self-governing peoples under colonial rule but to every people subject to foreign or racist domination, subjugation or exploitation. This can be interpreted as, a State’s territorial integrity and political unity only if that State acts in accordance with the principle of equal rights and self-determination of the people.
Interpreting the United Nations: a) The term “People” denotes a social entity possessing a clear identity and its own characteristics; b) It implies a relationship with a territory, even if the people in question have been wrongfully expelled from it and artificially replaced by another population; c) A ‘people’ should not be confused with ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities, whose existence and rights are recognized in Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. According to Ofuatey-kodjoe (1977) the beneficiary of the right to self-determination is a “Self-conscious politically coherent community that is under the political subjugation of another community”.
As the Government of India has recognized the “unique Naga history and situation”, apart from the other ethnic or linguistic minorities of North East India and across the Indian sub-continent. Hence, in the United Nation’s accepted sense, the politically self-conscious Naga people is a (Indigenous) community in subjugation of alien community and hence capable of a referendum to exercise the right to self-determination.
External and Internal Self-determination: “Where India stands”?
The external aspect of self-determination in the colonial context requires action from and imposes obligations on States to support and facilitate a people’s aspirations to reach independence. Conversely, self-determination outside the context of decolonization has an internal nature that consists of a people’s right to freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development, ideally through democratic governance.
The general view is simply that self-determination in the post-colonial era is more relevant in the context of minorities or ethnic groups which claim the right to self-determination as a remedy to denied political, civil, cultural and other human rights and this is sometimes used as a justification for secession.
The present 3rd Aug, 2015 ‘framework agreement’ between NSCN(IM) and GOI, as understood is under the scope of internal self-determination which is within the framework of the existing State. One can draw a clear picture that there is inconsistency in the statements, positions and actions of India. The double standard official positions demonstrated in the Third World bloc at the UN’s international political arena by consistently declaring the importance of the right to self-determination for all while in reality denying the fundamental rights to part of the population within India. The full support for self-determination in the case of “Tibetans” and “Palestinians” as against the “Nagas”. India changes position on issues, certain questions or conflicts depending on the international political climate, choose a position contrary to the obligations under international customary and treaty law.
According to Ved. P. Nanda, two situation justify secession: “persistent and serious violations of individual human rights” and “past unrepressed unjust seizure of territory”. The situation of the Nagas as a “people” in the perspective of international law, qualify in fulfilling the conditions of each and every proviso to justify the claim for secession or independence as described above in the Historical Wrongs; Scene – I, II, III. But easier said than done, the legal recognition of Nagas sovereignty and independent statehood hinge on the mature interpretation, integrity and interests of sovereign India.
The evolution of Naga Political Groups and its relevance: The farsighted Naga leaders since the formation of Naga Club in 1918, Naga National Council (NNC) in 1946 and throughout the times of A.Z. Phizo imbibed the aspiration for unification of all the Naga people across the frontier. They are the tallest of Leaders whom the Naga people owes to pay homage to, for all ages to come. Although they were modest war veterans, village heads, vendors and government employees with barest of education or some even devoid of it envisioned the unity of the Nagas as a whole and freedom against foreign dominion.
In the course of the struggle for self-determination, the Shillong Accord of 11th Nov, 1975 created the rift in the NNC and the dissidents left and formed the NSCN during 1980. Rationally, the dissent was inevitable and warranted inasmuch as the Shillong Accord was condemned by most of the leaders amongst the NNC as well. It is now self-evident about the evolution of 2(two) Naga Political Groups 1) NNC and 2) NSCN which in itself is healthy, in a democratic set up. Two party system occurs to be ideal as in the case of USA with 1) the Democratic Party and 2) the Republican Party. Whereas, the multi-party system of India alludes to be virtually unwieldy, and the one party system of Russia or China ploys tyranny.
Can the NPGs regroup into the fold of 1) NNC and 2) NSCN, eliminating all the personalized factions? To an ordinary college schooled ‘kuccha Naga’ like this writer, it is nonsensical on the part of the so called ‘National Workers’ or ‘Freedom Fighters’ to fabricate into splinter factions. No point of justification can dispel the contempt, whether you blame it on the handiwork of the Indian Intelligence or some vested interest Naga over-ground patrons; you are duty-bound to own up the guilt. Unless it was in pursuit of a common political strategy with the goal of self-determination at its core.
The conflict within the NNC, and the fratricidal killings that emerged and the perpetuation amongst the NPGs today, is beastly and unwarranted. If the NPGs can talk with the common enemy, the Govt. of India, behind the brutal crime against the Nagas, why can’t the NPGs team up and eliminate the childish factions? Is their self-indulgent factions more important than the cause of the Naga’s struggle for self-determination? The narcissistic factions have to be rejected downright. Undeniably, ‘Might is Right’ the clout of unity within the NPGs will strengthen the bargaining power to confront the mighty India.
Conclusion: It is apparent that the ensuing ‘framework agreement’ of 3rd August, 2015 between the GOI and NSCN(IM) was due to the persistent crusades of the latter overseas in multifarious platforms, shared as well by other NPGs to some extent.
The promise in support of the British war efforts of 1939-44 was a British Crown Colony to the Nagas (E.g. Hong Kong/ Macau). If the offer of the British Crown Colony comprising Naga Hills, adjacent Tracts in Burma, the Chittagong Hill Tracts of East Bengal and the North East Frontier Agency in 1946 was acceded to by the then NNC, the narrative of the Naga history might have been told in a different vein.
However, destiny lie in wait for the present Naga generation to carry out the choice of determining the fate of the future Naga generations. Everything is stronger when it is shared collectively. So, will the NPGs set aside the differences, and support the present dialogue with the GOI, at the threshold of Naga Political solution?
Is the ‘Sovereign State’, Government of India apt to make right the wrongs of the past? To allay the atrocious policies followed by the Nehruvian Congress Govt. of India which was tantamount to the heinous war crimes of Hitler’s Nazi Germany.
If the present talk is limited to internal self-determination, can the GOI accommodate the aspirations of the Naga people for integration of the Naga areas outside Nagaland into a single administrative unit? Perhaps, it is worth looking further on the possibility of conducting a referendum for the Nagas inhabiting Assam, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur under the observation of the extended organs of the United Nations like 1) The Art of Living Foundation founded by Sri Sri Ravi Shankar working in special consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), 2) The Baptist World Alliance which holds representation on the United Nations Human Rights Council. Finally, can the Nagas travel internationally with Nagaland Passport?
V.T. Chakhesang Kohima (vt.chakhesang@gmail.com)
