Synthesizing various Naga standpoints crucial

Witoubou Newmai
                                   
A superficial observation regarding Nagas in the context of the Naga political movement suggests that different sections of Nagas speak differently. However, a closer examination suggests that all these ‘differences’, in a broader and deeper sense, are the same thing talking from different standpoints producing different echoes. But again, if this subtle distinction is not recognized and treated accordingly, there is not an iota of doubt that they will be different-sections-of-Nagas-speaking-from different-standpoints-differently, with accompanying horrors.

Candidly speaking, no Naga engaging in the movement has made a stand to compromise the Naga political issue officially or otherwise. This tells us that there are underlying languages we need to recognize and nurture them, rather than draining energies to respond to those echoes coming from different standpoints. If we have to focus too much on the charms of various standpoints and their echoes, we will be only re-directing the ‘underlying languages’ to somewhere else.  

The above point then tells us that there is a two-way process at work: one is those echoes coming from different standpoints and the other is the ‘underlying languages’. Focusing either of them will make a great difference to our situation, for good or for bad. 

The context of no-one-has-compromised-the-issue further suggests that the intentions of all Naga sections or Naga groups are the same and one. But rather than recognizing and appreciating these intentions altogether, we are magnifying the standpoints and their echoes, which act also signals us that certainty is still a distant hope. 

 Ranging from the slogans as wide as Not-less-than-the-Sovereignty to the Shared Sovereignty and then down to several other softer standpoints, each section or group of Nagas is justifying their respective standpoints, saying that they will not end in a cul-de-sac from their present standpoints. This collective intention says something that needs to be focused and dilated to our advantage. ‘How do we begin this’ should be our talking point as a way of making the beginning. 

With this, exploring to resolve the tensions among different standpoints and slogans of Naga people is the urgent need of the hour. It is even more prudent to explore possibilities where none of the standpoints or slogans is eliminated. This should be the case, and we must do it by giving ways to a synthesis without eliminating the essence of the Naga political issue.

Looking for a synthesis would also mean Nagas must also find new jargons to resolve old problems. Since those calls such as ‘unity’, ‘reconciliation’, ‘sincerity,’ etc., etc. seem to become trite terms now, it is time we find new ways to create a new ambience where each one is attracted and 'free' to respond to the needs of fellow sufferers. 

The word ‘free’ is used here as it is one of the most important terms literally and in concept. The term ‘free’ in this context is best understood if we remind ourselves of American writer William James Durant's comment: “To say that we are free is merely to mean that we know what we are doing”. 

The different Naga standpoints and premises are also heavily formed and dictated by ‘circumstances.’ In other words, we allow ourselves not to be ‘free’ to decide. This, in fact, makes us inferior. As such a scenario has become our situation, we need to remind ourselves of Eleanor Roosevelt's thought, “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.” 

We should know what we do. Only those people who know what they do can only determine things through situations to their future. 
 

 



Related Posts