NAGA PEACE PROCESS

WHY IN NEWS:

• Five years since the signing of a framework agreement between the Indian government and the National Socialist Council of Nagalim -Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM), the deadlock in the talks that came about in October 2019 persists with the emergence of bottlenecks.
• The NSCN (I-M) has demanded that Nagaland Governor R.N. Ravi should be removed as the interlocutor for talks on the Naga accord.

BACKGROUND:

• Rooted in the politics of sub-nationalism, complexities of regional geopolitics and the evolving dynamics of counterinsurgency tactics, the Naga insurgency has defied a lasting solution
• It is an extraordinarily complicated conflict whose management has involved a mix of violent response and bargaining.

WHAT IS NAGA ISSUE?

• The key demand of Naga groups has been a Greater Nagalim (sovereign statehood) i.e redrawing of boundaries to bring all Naga-inhabited areas in the Northeast under one administrative umbrella.
• It includes various parts of Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Assam and Myanmar as well.
• The demand also includes the separate Naga Yezabo (Constitution) and Naga national flag.

DURING COLONIAL PERIOD:

• The British first came into contact with Nagas when they took over Assam and the Brahmaputra valley in the 1820s and moved into the hill areas to stop Naga raids, especially from the Angami tribe.
• In 1878 there was an Angami uprising, which was severely suppressed.
• After this the British gradually took over the whole area.
• However, in practice, British administration was limited.
• It was made a rule that no Indian official should be posted to the hills, that traders and speculators from the plains should be excluded, and that most officials were to be drawn from the Nagas themselves.
• Missionaries converted many Nagas to Christianity, and this facilitated literacy and the use of English, all of which encouraged a Naga sense of a separate identity.
• Prior to the independence of India, Nagas presented their own case for independent statehood.
• The first sign of Naga resistance was seen in the formation of the Naga Club in 1918, which told the Simon Commission in 1929 “to leave us alone to determine for ourselves as in ancient times”.
• However, when Assam (with other Indian provinces) was granted a large measure of self-rule in 1937, Naga areas remained under direct British administration.

POST-INDEPENDENCE PERIOD

• When India overthrew the British rule and became independent, Nagas revolted against the Indian government, declaring that they were a separate nation and would not accept New Delhi's rule.
• Led Angami Zapu Phizo, the Nagas comprising of 17 major tribes and 20 sub-tribes, united under the banner of Naga National Council (NNC) in August 1947 to carry out the fight against India
• Ao, Angami, Sema, Lotha, Tangkhul, Konyak, Rengma and Mao are some of the major Naga tribes and although each one of them speaks a different language, all of them demanded an independent Nagaland.
• NNC also held a ‘referendum’ in May 1951 claiming 99% of the Nagas voted in favour of an independent Nagaland but it was never accepted by the Indian government.
• The first general elections in 1952 were boycotted by the NNC and it started a violent secessionist movement making Naga insurgency the oldest in India.
• Phizo created an underground government called the Naga Federal Government (NFG) and a Naga Federal Army (NFA).
• In April 1956, the Indian Army was called in to crush the insurgency in what was, till then, the Naga Hills District of the State of Assam.
• To deal with the situation, the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, was subsequently enacted.
• Assam was divided in December 1963 and Nagaland became a separate state and another round of attempts were made for a political settlement
• NNC and its constituents the NFG and the NFA were declared "unlawful associations" under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act of 1967

PEACE INITIATIVES

• Shillong Accord (1975):
  • A peace accord was signed in Shillong in which the NNC-NFG accepted the Indian Constitution and agreed to come over-ground and surrender their weapons.
  • However, several leaders refused to accept the agreement, which led to the split of NNC.
  • Groups that are opposing the accord formed another terror group called National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN) in 1975
  • The NSCN later split into splinter groups during the late 1980’s
    • NSCM (IM) led by Issac Chisi Swu and Thuingaleng Muivah
    • NSCM (K) led by S.S. Khaplang

• Ceasefire Agreement (1997):
  • The NSCN-IM signed a ceasefire agreement with the government to stop attacks on Indian armed forces. In return, the government would stop all counter-insurgency offensive operations.

• Framework Agreement (2015) or Nagaland Peace Accord:
  • In this agreement, the Government of India recognised the unique history, culture and position of the Nagas and their sentiments and aspirations.
  • The NSCN also appreciated the Indian political system and governance.
  • Government decided to bring other Naga armed groups on board under the aegis of the Naga National Political Groups (NNGP).
  • However, the details of the agreement are yet to be released by the government.
• Recently, the State government decided to prepare the Register of Indigenous Inhabitants of Nagaland but later due to pressure from various fractions, the decision was put on hold.

CONCERNS:

• Apprehension of neighbouring states
  • Demand for a separate flag and a ‘constitution’ has been a key hindrance in building trust among the stakeholders.
  • Some Indian States contiguous to Nagaland have been affected through the mobilisation of the Naga population in these States.
  • That is why they are apprehensive of the demand for ‘Greater Nagalim’, which would imply a ceding of their Naga-inhabited territories.

• Framework agreement of 2015 does not include all insurgent groups:
  • Important insurgence group such as NSCN- Khaplang, whose cadres are reported to be inside Myanmar, is still outside the formal process.

• Collapse of law and order:
  • There is a culture of extortion and the collapse of general law and order situation in Nagaland, where organised armed gangs run their own parallel ‘tax collection’ regimes.
  • Extortions in the name of taxes have been a thorny facet of the Naga issue.
  • One of the major aims of the NSCN-IM has been to acquire formal recognition to this informal practice through negotiations

• Nagas suspect Indian government of ‘divide and rule’:
  • Certain sections of Nagas suspect that government brought several Naga armed groups under the aegis of the Naga National Political Groups to exploit existing divisions between the Nagas.

• Managing weapons:
  • As a ‘ceasefire’ group, NSCN’s cadres are supposed to retain their weapons inside the designated camps for self-defence only
  • But many influential cadres are seen moving with weapons in civilian localities, leading to many problems.
  • It would be an uphill task for the Centre to ensure that all weapons are surrendered at the time of the final accord.

• External state actors:
  • Naga insurgents were provided with what has come to be known as ‘safe haven’ in Myanmar.
  • India’s adversaries -China and Pakistan- also provided them with vital external support at one point of time

• AFSPA still not repealed:
  • Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) still remains in place and gives security forces impunity for human rights violations. 

SUGGESTIONS:

• Providing autonomous Naga territorial councils for Arunachal and Manipur.
• Common cultural body for Nagas across states.
• Specific institutions for state’s development, integration and rehabilitation of non-state Naga militia.
• Removal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act.
• A special status on the lines of Article 371-A will be explored for Naga areas outside Nagaland.
• A constitutional body to look into issues related to Nagas in their whole territorial spread.
• The Central government needs to reiterate its commitment to finalising the Naga accord while seeking to re-engage with the NSCN (I-M) without giving in to its arbitrary demands.

CONCLUSION:

• Nagas are culturally heterogeneous groups of different communities/tribes having a different set of problems from mainstream population.
• In order to achieve the long-lasting solution, their cultural, historical and territorial extent must be taken into consideration.
• Therefore any arrangement to be worked out should lead to social and political harmony, economic prosperity and protection of the life and property of all tribes and citizens of the states

PRACTICE QUESTION:

Q. ‘Naga insurgency has a long history rooted in the politics of sub-nationalism, complexities of regional geopolitics and ethnic conflicts’. In the light of this statement examine the concerns associated with the Nagaland Peace Accord of 2015?