This will be a short response to Iralu’s reply to my article of December 29,2016, titled, “A small Biblical correction to Imchen’s article.”
First, I will not respond to his substantive arguments supporting the Naga nationalist movement because I’ve done that in a number of previous articles. I just want to point out to readers that if you go back to his dozens of articles over the decades, and even his 400-page book “The Naga Saga,” you will see the same arguments again and again, with no alterations or additions.
Second, following from the first point, Iralu’s arguments are always based on his view that history and God mandate that the Nagas have their own sovereign nation. He never addresses my points that, even if the Nagas deserve a nation, they are not going to get one, and to continue pursing a delusional fantasy distracts the Nagas from the necessary business of dealing with the corruption, intimidation, and violence of the Naga people against the Naga people in what is a failed state. Moreover, pursuing the nationalist fantasy will end up leading to the destruction of the Naga people.
Third, Iralu suggests in his article that I might be “an Indian agent planted to support the present so called ‘Shared Sovereignty’ concept offered by India ….” When he sat across a table from me this past June at my hotel in Kohima he did not accuse me of such a thing. Perhaps he would share with the readers any new facts he has acquired to accuse me of such a thing.
Lastly, he closes with, “Our struggle … is based on concrete factual, historical, political and legal truths.” This statement is the statement of a fanatic, the rantings of a mind that long ago closed itself off to any new information which might force him to reconsider his position.
Iralu wouldn’t know the truth of the Naga situation in relation to the government of India and the rest of the world if he tripped across that truth. He is a blind, obsessive old man who is willing to sacrifice the Nagas alive and surrounding him today to a delusional idea and the dead martyrs of 50 and 60 years ago. I have pointed out in a previous article that he has nothing but contempt for the Nagas who don’t view the Naga nationalist movement the way he does. He never had the courage to respond to that article, and never will. He, in the end, is trapped in the past, and will die for a lost cause. The only issue is, will he take other Nagas to their deaths with him?
The words I’ve just written above sadden me. I considered Iralu a friend and I am aware that the things I’ve said about his writings and him are cruel. But I did not start this journey into the morass of Naga politics to make friends, but to assist the Naga people in staying alive and turning their dysfunctional state into one which respects the rule of law and not the rule of corruption, coercion, and violence, that cares more about life, education, jobs, and peace than a fantasy that can lead nowhere but destruction and death.
