Moa Jamir
“History will be kind to me for I intend to write it,” goes a popular quote attributed to former British Prime Minister, Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill, commonly known as Winston Churchill. While the exact event of the particular quote is unclear, the famous war-time prime minister used variations of the ‘I shall write that history’ expression often from the 1930s as per the Churchill Project of Hillsdale College. The closest was the speech in the House of Commons on January 23, 1948, where Churchill, as per Oxford Essential Quotations stated: “For my part, I consider that it will be found much better by all Parties to leave the past to history, especially as I propose to write that history myself.”
His exact words apart, Churchill’s comments drew attention to some past events never speak for themselves and are often influenced by another quote attributed to him, “History is written by Victors” but again with unknown origin. It is also true that ideological orientation, due to a lack of proper documentation, can influence historiography. Ironically, despite Churchill’s exalted statesmanship, his legacy is also being questioned by historians in recent years, particularly from the sub-continent, part of the sprawling British Empire till the first half of the 20th century.
This holds true if one studies the political trajectories of a nation or a community, and should serve as reminders that ‘writing’ political history is a hugely contentious exercise and does not simply depend on asserting present exigencies, but taking into account past legacies and future possibilities.
Is this verifiable in the protracted Naga political history? One can safely assert that there are too many contenders to ‘write’ the history over the years, both by the general public as well as different Naga Political Groups (NPGs). Agreements, Statehood, and Accord have been signed over the years, essentially, adding other chapters in the annals of the chequered political journey of the Nagas without any concrete conclusion. Peace talks continue.
Accordingly, as the quest and call for the “peaceful, honourable and early solution” gain momentum, with phrases such as ‘pragmatism’ and ‘contemporary realities’ used liberally with gusto, such loaded adjectives need to be introspected holistically from historical perspectives. For it can be argued that a ‘pragmatic approach’ or ‘contemporary realities’ at a particular point in time, could also be the reason behind the present realities, at another point in time. Such concerns should be taken into perspective as the Nagas embark on yet another journey of ‘writing’ history.
For any comment, drop a line to jamir.moa@gmail.com
