The cease-fire between the Government of India (GoI) and NSCN (I-M) will in all likelihood be extended beyond July 31 when the next round of talks is held at Dimapur. This is also the overwhelming opinion of the Naga civil society groups as was proclaimed during the sixth consultative meeting held on July 27 at Camp Hebron. What is however not certain is on the period that both sides will agree upon. While there is every reason to suggest that a one year period will be preferable to both parties to work from, it is all the same highly questionable whether New Delhi is deserving of another lease of one year when it has done very little on the time it had been handed out. It was given to understand that last time round the ceasefire extension by one year (after hectic parleys in Bangkok) was given in good faith to allow enough time especially for the GoI to come out with some concrete decision. But it has been a disappointing one year with very little movement taking place in the peace talks.
The question that needs to be put before Delhi is whether an extension by another year will do any good to its political intransigence. While no one would have been so realistic as to pin hopes on an early settlement, but then ten years since the ceasefire was first signed in August 1997, there is a feeling of exasperation over the delay in the peace talks. The NSCN (IM) on its part must impart a sense of urgency to the endless of talks and this it will be able to do only if it is able to work out a more meaningful ceasefire and insisting on a result oriented mechanism to keep the process both relevant and time bound. The GoI will need to be clear about its agenda and give proper direction to the Naga peace process. For this, the role of the Prime Minister must become more visible and the Naga side must now start to insist for a more active involvement since the basis of the peace process mentions about talks at the prime ministerial level, which has clearly not been the case from the Indian side.
The ceasefire and the peace process will be justified only if it produces concrete results - tangible deeds of peace. And this, both sides will need to bear in mind so that people retain their faith in the peace process, which at present is truly lacking in confidence.
Given the demand for a peaceful resolution of the Indo-Naga issue the current truce will have to be extended. However, both sides will have to clearly put in place a qualitatively better ceasefire than the one currently in place. The process cannot go on as it was, with endless talks but nothing to show for it. The process either moves ahead or it dies. If the ceasefire has to hold, the political process has to move at a certain pace and for this there is a need to shift gears.
