By- Dr. Aaron Lungleng
The exotic Nagas are different from Indian besides, she was never been under the control of any suzerain state, thereby, the Nagas proclaimed the Tri junction of China, India and Myanmar as the Land for Christ.
Sir Robert Raid, the Political Agent of Manipur who later become the Governor of Assam said, “The Nagas are not Indian in any sense of the world, neither in origin, nor in the language, nor in appearance, nor inhabit outlook”.
The Nagas have stood their ground and staged their protest against aggression ever since the colonial era (British rule) and still persistently rebelling after the withdrawal of the notion of colonialism in the globe. In sweat and blood they have rebelled, in prayer and tears they have addressed their grievances to the world community, yet they are still subjugated by the modern day colonialist (India and Myanmar) but, trading the Nagas with their act in the most brutal convention. However, “the faith in the world community support for humanity is questionable as a hope against hope” for the struggling people for self-determination. “Might is Right” sounds rhetoric, but, stands still true, Indian democracy type is a blasphemous democracy that strayed from the Gandhian ideal of democracy, but the worst enemy to conflict settlement- now and forever, the weak and the poor will always be the victim of the influential injustice. International peace and justice of the global community needs to investigate the cry of the Nagas for they would not able to do nothing when everything cannot be undone.
Where is an Indian right to claim Nagas as Indian or the whole of the Northeast ethnic groups of the Mongolian stock? When the Indian national anthem out rightly and distinctly made her position clear that she (Bharat) is the hearts of the Punjab, Sindh, Gujarat, and Maratha, Odisha and Bengal of the Dravidian racial stock bounded by the Himachal and the hills of Vindhyas.
The “Survival of the fittest” is a phrase that originated from Darwinian evolutionary theory as a way of describing the mechanism of natural selection. The biological concept of fitness is defined as reproductive success. In Darwinian terms, the phrase is best understood as “survival of the form that will leave the most copies of itself in successive generations”. Social Darwinists claimed that “the survival of the fittest” is interpreted as “an ethical perception that sanctioned cut-throat economic competition” which justify laissez-faire (“Leave it to us” or “Let us do “it”) in economics, war and racism. Critics of the theories of evolution argued that “survival of the fittest” provides a justification for behavior that undermines moral standards by letting the strong set standards of justice to the detriment of the weak. It is also suggested that “survival of the fittest” implies treating the weak, even though in some cases of good social behavior – co-operating with others and treating them well – might improve evolutionary fitness.
Applying this concept to human society, Kropotkin presented mutual aid as one of the dominant factors of evolution, the other being self-assertion, and concluded that in the practice of mutual aid, which we can retrace to the earliest beginnings of evolution, thus we find the positive and the undoubted origin of our ethical conceptions; and we can affirm that in the ethical progress of man, mutual support and mutual struggle not communal struggle – has had the leading part. In its wide extension, even at the present time, we also see the best guarantee of a still loftier evolution of our race.
To apply ”survivor of the fittest” in Naga revolutionary struggle for self-determination; any group(s) or struggle society that cannot innovation people’s based principle and mandate; that cannot redefined their nationality and socio-cultural and geopolitical boundaries, unaware of global responsiveness; lack of competent people with new ideas, models, visions of share living and those who cannot foresee the oppressors malicious maneuvers of “divide and rule”; overweight by “ism” (the ”I” and ”thin”) cannot withstand the test of time but inevitable to become the history of the distant past.
Taking the anarchists view and the concepts of “survival of the fittest” into the revolutionary movement, it is they, who support co-operation rather than competition. The fittest is he who not necessarily the best at competing individually, but often the community made up of those best at working together. In the animal world we have seen that the vast majority of species live in societies, and that they find in association the best arms for the struggle for life: understood, of course, in its wide Darwinian sense- not as a struggle for the sheer means of existence, but a struggle against all natural conditions unfavorable for the species in which individual struggle for mutual aid to attain the greatest development, are invariably not necessary to numerous but the most efficient that open to prosper further progress.
In order to defeat tyranny, emphasized on land and national identity consciousness alone does not serve the contention, but the undivided strength, mutual trust and love should be the forerunner. The common struggle should focus on encouraging the movements for positive change. Negative advancement cannot be termed as a development approach in any way- it is self-destructive. A struggle people should advocate to create a platform to the younger generations for proactive initiatives and compulsion on shoulders national responsibilities with integrated vision and reconciliatory philosophy for the sake of their shared future instead of misleading and sowing hatred between brothers. The fundamental duty of the elites and the younger generation is to protect and serve the nation in any capacity otherwise what is elite and young for? The young Naga generation should love the nation rather than self-comfort under the providence of the advisories. The present younger generation skeptical to patriotism could rightly attribute to our elders mistrust and ethnocentric behavior.
Nagas are at present weaker to his opponent therefore, in order to wage a defeating war, sawing discordant; misleading through articles, subjective to self; indoctrinating relegation among the common brother etc. Is what todays so called learned/social leaders, political/group leaders wants the younger generation to inherit? Are these the best powerful weapons to waylay the oppressor for achieving the long cherish Nagas dream to live as free people?
No, the sacred and secret weapon I consider is to ally with one’s brothers. Take notice, no human tangle on the earth’s surface without any roots as the floating cloud. Therefore, one must find the biological and bridge socio-cultural breaches first. In pursuit of political, social, economic and cultural rights- one faith and one God are the utmost requirement for collective life on earth or life after death.
Are the Nagas ready to take the consequences of the makeover?
A common saying goes, “history repeats itself”. Likewise, should the Nagas made a fine classic to such statement? Everything changes in due course of time, but change has no definite connotation. Change may alter into either good or bad because “beauty is deceitful”. Cease fire and any agreement signed with the GoI cannot be taken into confidence as experience taught us. Therefore, as a free people, are Nagas ready to accept Indian constitution and consolidate into Indian union or ready to give a counter befitting reply that will disintegrate the princely kingdoms and cut the bottle neck in case, she repeats her deceitful conducts of buying time to dwindle the movement and the latter term as an appeasement policy further term the struggle for self-determination or national defense to terrorism so that they could launch a wipe out operation.
Beware if the bad moon rises! 20 long years of cease fire and hundreds times of talks yet solution to the protracted political issues retain to Indian five year political advancement. On the other hand, 20 years might have given Nagas an opportunity to prepare in human resources, military strength as well as developed a weapon to counter with nuclear weapons. Because, air must be controlled by air, water by water and fire with fire, a man should fight a man not to a child- healthy and mighty cannot torment the weak, lest he lack moral, who knows his brother may be loftier than the imposter! The course of Nagas struggle for self-determination dated back to the formative period commonly known as Naga Club (1918-1939). Though, the Naga club ended up by submitting a memorandum on behalf of the entire Nagas on November 10th January 1929, to exclude the Nagas from any constitutional framework of India. Nevertheless, it gave birth to the Naga national consciousness. The second phase of development can be seen in the establishment of the Naga Hills District Tribal Council (NHDTC) on 1st April 1945 under CR. Powsey, the then Deputy Commissioner of the Naga Hills. It campaigned for integration of Naga Territories to create a sovereign Naga State however, it ended up unsuccessfully.
Later, the Naga Hills District Tribal Council (NHDTC) reorganized into a political organization called the Naga National Council (NNC) on the 2nd of February 1946. Mayangnokcha Ao was elected as the President. During the period of the NNC (1964-1975) Naga polity attained the highest peak that was to establish a sovereign independent Naga country. It was the worst of time yet the best of time to settle Indo-Naga conflict. It was during NNC time, the foundation of signing an agreement laid for peaceful Indo-Naga settlement between GoI and the Nagas. The 9 Point Agreement/ Hydari Agreement that recognized the right of the Nagas to develop themselves according to their freely expressed will yet, the 9 point agreement is taken as non- existent after gaining control of Nagalim through military might by the modern day colonialist (India).
Soon as the slogan of sovereign states “a completely natural independent” was raised with the indomitable spirit that spark for the Free Naga Nation and self-determination, India shrewdly designed a divide and rule policy inherited from the British colonial rule which resulted to the birth of the “non-ever sectional demand” (the present Nagaland state) by carving out a selected area of ancestral Nagalim to doze off Nagas dream as a free people once and for all. Indian policy of disintegration was materialized by the Naga moderates commonly known as the Naga People Convention (NPC) in 1963. Further, they (the Indianize Nagas) tried to assimilate and acculturate all the Nagas be it revolutionaries or the general civil Nagas into the mainstream of India.
The first cease fire (Sept.1964- Oct 1967) between the two nations (India-Naga) reached at the intervention of R. Suisa (ex-MP & Tatar Hoho Member of the NNC), Bertrand Russel, Rev. Michael Scott and the churches of Nagalim on 6th Sept. 1964. AZ. Phizo head the NNC who since 1956 been in the overseas seeking foreign assistance in attaining Naga Independence while Smt. Indira Gandhi holds the government of India who succeeded the first Indian Prime Minister. Indo-Naga entered into cease fire for the second time in 1972 but, abruptly broke out in 1957 without any lasting solution. According to Mullik (My Year with Nehru), the efforts of the peace talk proposal failed because GoI refused to withdraw its Army from the Naga areas and the Nagas refused for negotiation of a political settlement within the constitution of India.
The best of times was turned down by the then leaders who plainly rejected the proposal of R. Suisa (1966) which he had deliberately discussed with the Prime Minister of India, Smt. Indira Gandhi who also conveyed her willingness to negotiate a Bhutan type status for Nagaland in a separate entity. The short sightedness blinded by totalitarian insisted to refuse any Naga Leaders to accept anything less than complete/full independent for self-determination of the Naga people.
The invincible NNC faded from suzerainty in the Nagas struggle for self-determination soon after the signing of the Shillong Accord in 1975 on the 11th day of the 11th month without any condition accepted the constitution of India and surrendered their arms to the GoI. The dream of the free Naga people to become a sovereign nation and to take her rightful place in Asia’s new chapter in history shattered on this very day. It was the representatives of the NNC responsible to the Naga National Government (you name it whatever) that signed the agreement, therefore; it was the NNC that capitulated, betrayed and humiliated the Naga nation in the highest act of treason. Observe whether the allegation to NNC stands logical consistency or otherwise.
Had the accord out rightly not been condemned to salvage the Naga nation as well as had not the courage with a vision to form a new revolutionary government (National Socialist Council of Nagalim) in 1980 on the 21st of March, Nagas are left to rootless people without a history, but remain a mere Indian (whether you are a distinct being either in biological or cultural). Own brothers and leaders may forsake but God never forsake! By the grace of the Almighty and by the virtue of visionary statesmanship Isak Chishi Swu and Th. Muivah the Nagas are taken to the greater height from neighboring nations to the international platforms that India cannot hide the Nagas reality any longer, but force to be more pragmatic rather than using colonial abusive policy.
Realizing that there is no glory in war and conflict, but, only leads to destruction of humanity by the two national entities, the historic Indo-Naga political imbroglio, a ceasefire and peace talk was agreed upon by the then Prime Minister of India, Narhasimha Rao and President of NSCN, Isak Chishi Swu and Gen. Secretary NSCN, Th. Muivah to settle Naga issues amicably through political means as the matter was purely a political stalemate. Ever since, cease-fire between the Government of India and the NSCN (I-M) extend indefinitely notwithstanding the core issues but to remain elusive subjected to the progress of the talks until the ”Framework Agreement” that signed on August 3, 2015. The FA has not yet been publicly known, but NSCN leaders interpreted to it as enduring peaceful co-existence of the two entities within the concept of share sovereignty. Th. Muivah in his address on its “38th Republic Day” asserted that the historic Framework Agreement recognizes the unique history, identity, sovereignty and territories of the Nagas. It also recognizes the legitimate right of the Nagas to integrate all Naga territories. On the other hand, the prime peace envoys (GoI) wherever they go interpreted according to their suited political conveniences and gain which paramount Indo-Naga peace deal to a mere “Indian electoral politics”. On top of that, in the midst of signing the framework to settle Indo-Naga political problem, she is frantically fencing Indo-Myanmar border where half part of Nagalim is conquered by the Myanmar military junta. It is observed that Indo- Naga political problem is not Indian unitary states dispute, but pertaining to modern colonial issues indistinguishable with suppression by might when Nagas refused to join the Indian Union, thus, “Uniqueness of Naga History” stands undisputed and unparalleled with any merged Indian unitary states due to the Naga non - consent to Indian Union ever since or before Indian Independent in 1947. So, the Nagas political issues cannot be equally labeled with other struggling people and the doctrine of Indo-Naga political settlement cannot be borrowed by any people that have assented to Indian Union.
If Indian constitution is a legal law to the Indian, the GoI should not shy away from confronting what is right from the beginning. Dividing the Nagas is clearly revealed by Nehru “One of their grievances is that under our constitution, we split them up in different political areas. Whether it is possible or desirable to bring them together again is for us to consider. Also, what measure of autonomy we should give them so that they can lead their own lives without any sensation of interferences (Secret personal letter from Nehru to Medhi, No. 1116-PMH/ 56, New Delhi, May 13 1956). Therefore, under no circumstances, integration (the birth rights) of Nagas cannot be stopped by any land and people.
Further, as India is a member country of the United Nations Organization as well as a signatory member state of the Global Human Rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Right (UDHR) that enshrine basic Human Rights (Art. XV. Everyone has the right to a nationality. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality). Notwithstanding, UN Assembly resolution 217A (iii) 1948 had declared to observe strictly to sub-commission on prevention of Discrimination and protection of minorities; UDHR preamble 1 (v) whereas, member states pledged themselves to achieve in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for observation of human rights and fundamental freedom. Yet, the largest democracy (India) commitment to the Global Organization is perceived to sign during her hallucination. Thereby, any agreement with GoI cannot be taken into confidence. Anytime she may provoke the Nagas when her dream to pull Nagas into Indian constitution failed. Her frustration would result in the talks being called off at “any time” and declared Naga national movement to terrorism. Thus, the cease-fire is commended as a slow killing or slow poisoning with a tactical move for ultimate submission.
The idea of share sovereignty can be a global model if India is sincere in solving one of the longest political conflict in Asia and the longest cease fire observant in the whole world. But, the Government of India perpetual extension of cease-fire appears to be in term on the pretext of buying time and conceal her motive of extrication under the cover of a long interval. Her signposts weight unitary territorial integrity heftier rather than pursuing enduring neighborhood within the fold of shared sovereignty. It is very vivid that GoI love in continuing the current cease fire as long as possible. Mustn’t one need to be curious about the reason behind it? As long as the ceasefire extend, the Nagas are on the losing ground due to various socio-economic aspects while, India reaps enormous tactical gains to draw Nagas into the Indian socio-cultural mainstream as well as advantageous to explore the all Nagas venerable aspects. In the name of development, Indian agencies are working dawn to night to douse off Naga national spirit besides her gluttonous military that studies the situation minutely from which portion she needs to take the first bite. Another interest of the GOI in the North East is to take the commanding height in ASEAN countries, thus, “Look East/ Act East policy” is projected for India economic as well as political, and security. The objective of cease fire is unsubtly a counter offensive policy, especially vying toward smothering Naga national movement and preparedness against Chinese aggression.
These articles focus on a positive approach towards India to be more pragmatic rather than playing divisive cards on the Nagas. It also addresses to either India or Nagas to make a resolute breakthrough of the snarl issue for the sake of peaceful co-existence without further delay. There are no isolated people with isolated freedom- total freedom can be attained only when there is interdependency. The idea to remain dominant aggressor would invite total disintegration and annihilation of her own glory. The hard earn national progressive investment could be easily harvested by contenting nations.
India solving Naga political problem devoid of pride and prejudice will surely enhance her struggle to stand as a world matured nation. The statement that appears in the local newspaper, “the framework agreement are said to turn the policies of confrontation and opposition into the politics of dialogue and cooperation; foe to a friend; suppression of rights to recognition of right; threat of future to the protection of future”(5/13/2017/Nagaland post). Such are the ideas that every peace loving individual-society-nation should praise for and welcome such peaceful moves to co-exist in peace and harmony.
The hard earned peace deal will be so dear to be lost again for both the parties in fact, that antagonism among neighbor is a curse because one cannot afford to have a sound sleep and a bright leisure day. It is a crucial time for both the parties, but demand respect. No doubt Nagas will be truthful ten hundred times if only India is ready to resolve Naga political problem politically in time before mistrust miasma covered the highway to peace. In the case of cease fire and talk for procrastination and malicious tactics Nagas need not worry but take the opportunity as a sweet time for preparedness to any eventuality. This time break away from political settlement should not bonder to look back never to negotiate other than leave the Nagas alone. It is rather better to share Nagas’ sovereignty with ancestral descent than sharing the living bowl to the unknown and unrelated aliens. It is an established fact that the Nagas struggle for self-determination is not a secessionist movement, but a rebellion to oppressor/aggression more over to the modern day a terror colonialist.
Nature exposed the bitter reality of a valor and weedier in any bargain that; it is often the dominant that plays imposition to the weak against their will thereby, resistance begins and the conflict enlarges. In such circumstance, Nagas approach to exist as a free people need to realize the anarchists view and the concepts of “survival of the fittest” explained in elaborated manner. The awaken generation should now despise communal antagonism; mistrust; mislead; instead extend support to one another in cooperation rather than competition and blaming over one another. It has been stated that the fittest is he who not necessarily the best at combating individually, but often the community made up of those best at working together. Nagas might be weaker and lesser in number, but nevertheless, the most efficient is he who opens to prosper further progress. Therefore, if the pursuit of Nagas is political, social, economic and cultural rights- it requires collective responsibility deprived of moderates’ intervention; sectional bargaining; egocentrism of any form, but realize the value of unison in Christ as one and only to harness the common–share future.