Akang Ao
The contemporary Naga is indebted to pay tons of requiem and sacred gratitude posthumously to our yesteryear freedom fighters for their political wisdom and sagacity whilst mooting our civil, political and human rights much before the adoption of the charter of United Nations Organizations in October 15th 1945 and the declaration of Universal Human Rights in the year 1948. We must beg apology to them for wrongs committed, if any and salute them for their maturity and political wisdom. We should also urge the present National workers/ Freedom fighters to live and emulate, and earn the similar love and respect from the people for whom one is serving with sacrifice against all odds.
Naga political problem is not a myth nor a mystique, but a reality, legal and justified from all perspective under international legal system and structure of government. Unmistakably, our apprehension that the government of India is not sincere towards Indo-Naga peace process is being proved. In the side line, India too rejected I 1954, the implementation of the 1948 resolution made between India and Pakistan in regard to the Plebiscite in Kashmir on the plea that Jammu & Kashmir is part of India and an internal Indian problem. Furthermore, India also rejected Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s proposal to implement ‘The Chenab Formula’ in1960 (NDTV 24X&: Talk show of Ajai Shukla’s ‘Foreign Correspondents’, Dt: 04/02/06).
Time and again, Pakistani leaders’ proposals for Plebiscite/Referendum in J&K with the presence of International observers have fallen on deaf ears of Indian leaders. Perhaps, these may be the reason as to why J&K and the Northeastern India are bleeding continuously. India’s magnanimity towards its neighbour since Independence is only in the division of ‘ Berubari Union No:12’ a tract of land in –between West Bengal and erstwhile East Pakistan. The dispute over Berubari was settled through an agreement between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan on September 10th 1058, whereby, the land was divided between Indian Union and East Pakistan.
Nagas had asserted their political right overtly since 1919 and undertaken a number of political strategies with British India and was offered various status then too. It will be quite inappropriate on the part of ULFA and the PLA which are only recent creation on economic and unemployment problem.
There were 6 (six) rounds of talks between Naga leaders and the Government of India (GoI) during the cease fire period 1964-1966 over the Naga political rights but, GoI did not give any proper hearing or attention, which is why the talks ended in a fiasco leading to disillusionment and hostility towards the GoI. At long last, after 31 years, the second inning of cease-fire began from July 1997 and launching of the face to face dialogue, in Prime Ministerial level, with the hope that literal peace would come to the Nagas land. Let alone the negotiations during the 1964-66 cease-fire, in the current cease fire period of 9 (nine) years, 61 meetings of dialogue mostly abroad, have so far not achieved any perceptible outcome which may be seen as a stunning joyride and sightseeing tour for both the negotiating parties at the expense of Peace and bloodshed for the Nagas and the taxpayers’ money.
It is also quite disturbing to have to hear from Oscar Fernandes, Union Minister & main interlocutor, GoI during his recent purposeful visit to Nagaland that the number of seats of State legislative Assembly members may be increased and the proposed Delimination of Assembly Constituencies may not be applied in Nagaland. This is evidently the cheap GoI’s ‘Quid pro quo’ policy to sway away from the Nagas.
On the backdrop of the Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio’s statement in the matter of Interim Agreement, as we are all aware, specially in International or Multi- national subject, stages of agreement either in part or piece-meal may be considered and gauging the circumstances and facts, subsidiary agreements may again be made and safeguarded in carrying out towards fulfillment of the parent contractual agreement or till an eventual agreement is made final. In the absence of a final agreement executed presently, and the dialogue process coming to an abrupt halt, the whole exercise of the past 9 (nine) years would be futile. Hence, the Chief Minister’s views should not be questioned or dismissed casually.
We have a right to be recognized as a Nation, but before that, we have also a responsibility to be a good citizen of the world, capable of carrying out the duties of universal law and justice and of Human Rights in the eyes of the International community.
