‘UNC demand within Indian constitution’

DIMAPUR, FEBRUARY 25 (MExN): GPRN/NSCN members from ‘Southern Nagaland’ today questioned the United Naga Council (UNC) as to why it sought an “alternative political arrangement under the Indian constitution”. “UNC is not a political body and therefore it is not a right platform to make any political demand,” maintained a statement issued by a group of senior members of the GPRN/NSCN hailing from the present state of Manipur.
It is unacceptable: Shepoumaramth region, GPRN/NSCN
The signatories noted that September 14, 2010 memo and said its contents “flagrantly contradicts the historical and political rights of the Naga people.”  The memo has divided and confused the Nagas in general and southern Nagas in particular, it stated.  The decision was arrived at a meeting of the “Shepoumaramth Region, GPRN/NSCN” held at the ‘Oking’ on February 24 in the presence of D.T Lincoln, Member, National Political Advisory Council (NPAC), S.K. Peter, Kilonser, L.D John, K.S Solomon, Ashuhru Ben, P Caiphas who is chairman of Shepoumaramth Region of the GPRN/NSCN, Th. Veishe George, secretary, Shepoumaramth Region, Maj. Z D Akho, Maj. Ngaoni Micheal, Maj. Pfokriihrii James, Maj. Shemshem, Maj. Dihe, all from the Naga Army.
It acknowledged that UNC as a civil society organization being a part of Forum for Naga Reconciliation (FNR) to ensure reconciliation among Naga political groups.  However, the signatories said they would not be a part of the “UNC’s diabolical stand.” “It is too ambiguous and bereft of political wisdom,” it maintained.  “Being a part of FNR and demanding Alternative Political Arrangement from the GOI at the same time is a double standard,” I maintained.  It considered the UNC doing the exact opposite of what the FNR is doing.
It accused UNC of masterminding the alleged demand to make “Ukhrul the summer capital of Manipur.”
It also noted the “whisper” that Phungyar under Ukhrul District will be made a separate district and said UNC and its leadership cannot claim to be innocent in these ‘divisive activities.’
Accusing UNC has “bluntly obeyed its mentors” for years and ignoring the “stark reality of the Southern Nagas” the signatories said any demand that contradicts Naga political stand against the will of the Naga people shall be resisted.
The dreams, aspirations and brotherhood of the Nagas should not be destroyed by surge of selfish emotions of few individuals in the name of UNC, it said.
FNR formed in 2008 and mandated by Nagas including tribal hohos from southern Nagaland, have helped Naga political groups and the Naga people in general to see the Indo-Naga political issue through common vision and approach, the statement read.
It questioned as to how the UNC could not take into consideration events such as the three top leaders signing the Covenant of Reconciliation in June 2009, Naga political groups burying differences through “the Monyakshu Conclave of 15th July 2010”, the September 18 2010 Summit at Dimapur and the December 14 2010 declaration by three Naga political groups to unite etc.
“If these achievements could not restrain the UNC from pursuing its own agenda, there is sufficient reason to believe that UNC has committed treason against the Naga people,” it alleged. It maintained that The UNC is never a competent body to settle political matters. Those people driving UNC must immediately stop employing divisive politics, it cautioned.
In this connection the signatories appealed to the Naga people in general and those inhabiting the four districts of Manipur in particular to wake up to the reality around them.