Dr. K. Hoshi
Every year on August 14, 2016, Nagas received doses of bland history on Naga nationalism from myriads of national leaders. History is our corner stone. Therefore, it was in the fitness of occasion like Naga Independence Day to do justice by reflecting on the Naga history of independence. Nevertheless, in this age of confusion, frustration and despair; young generation Nagas have developed aversion to such monotonous historical narratives. Young Nagas want to hear, not just history in narrative but also narrative exposition and interpretation in right perspective for better and greater enlightenment. They want applied nationalism that not only fits into contemporary global and domestic situations but also that will give new direction. They want to know where the Naga nationalist leaders are taking them. They want to see clear roadmap drawn for them because the future belongs to them. They want to be sure of their landing ground. They do not want to tread the path that cannot guarantee the security of their future. They want to come out of stagnancy and move ahead. They have developed the dangerous attitude of no matter what. Their expectation is reasonable. All national governments and leaders claim they are working for the future generation but the young Nagas are not convinced. They are fast losing hope in nationalism because of prevailing situation in Nagaland. They want new political, social and economic orders. They want an end to uncertainty. These thoughts are stirring the minds of young Nagas because over the years, nationalism is stuck in wilderness and people in comfort zone have taken greater control of our domestic affairs with the help of our opposing power. In recent years, Naga nationalism has been put to harsh test. If nationalism has to survive the test of time and situation, it demands for an honest retrospection, introspection and serious appraisal of un-nationalist conducts.
Thousands had laid down their lives protecting the sovereignty of Nagaland. It is grossly unfair to write off their sacrifices by one stroke. It is tragic that many present day generation Nagas, particularly the educated class who are already in comfort zone, have no compunction to compromise nationalism principle and ready to sell off Naga right once again. A section of educated Nagas argue that Westphalian ideal type of Naga sovereignty is now outdated because it does not fit into global situation of interdependence. Wikipedia source defined Westphalian sovereignty as, (quote) “Westphalian sovereignty is the principle of international law that each nation state has sovereignty over its territory and domestic affairs, to the exclusion of all external powers, on the principle of non-interference in another country’s domestic affairs, and that, each state (no matter how large or small) is equal in international law” (unquote). They try to make their point that the past leaders were stuck in idealism and unable come into realism/pragmatism. They blame the past leaders of being unable to adapt to global reality of interdependence, which they said is causing impediments to economic progress of Nagas. The realist/pragmatist or rather the non-idealist blames the past leaders for landing Nagas into present state of confusion and hopelessness. That is because they can see Nagas only relative to India and not separate from India. To them, India is a giant and Nagaland, just a dot. They would argue that India has become economic and nuclear superpower and that; Nagas are entirely dependent on India. They would question, “What can a tiny country like Nagaland do against India? How will Nagas sustain the country even if independence becomes reality?” A. Z. Phizo, in his fourteen point guidelines to Nagas said, “Only clerk-minded people think like that because they cannot see beyond their writing hands”. Non-idealist also argues that present generation Nagas have lost taste for sovereign Nagaland and posterity/generation-next will be even worse. It is skeptically pre-mature to conclude that posterity will give up the ideal of sovereignty because the educated generation-next Nagas will be more resourceful than the past and present generations. As they advanced and opportunities diminished or saturated, new ideas will emerge. There will be soul searching which, in turn will lead them back to our history. Aspiration and inspiration will renew and history will repeat.
The most despicable thing is that, our generation, instead of appreciating our fore-fathers and fathers for laying the strong foundation of Naga nationhood have no inhibition to question their wisdoms. The pioneers founded modern sovereign nation state of Nagaland with clear mind and vision. Nationalism was the driving force. It was philosophy-inspired nationalism. They infused idealism into nationalism. Without an inspired idealism, Naga nationalism could have died with 16-PA. It was because of idealism that Naga nationalism had survived the test of time and came thus far. They held idealism dear to their hearts because they knew that without idealism, nationalism would be dead. If present day non-idealist Nagas cannot appreciate the ideals of past leaders, it was not their problem. The problem is with today’s contemporary leaders, devoid of that element of nationalism ideal. Naturally, non-idealists cannot fathom the in-depth philosophy of nationalism defined by idealism. It is not wise to accuse our past leaders as idealists and not realists. We are what we are today because of their pragmatism. The problems that exist in Naga society today is our own creation and not theirs’. During their times, they unified the Nagas because of which, we live as one people today. They were able to sustain that unity until some chose to betray them. Today’s generation failed to follow their path. That was the cause of this depredation.
Empires have ended. Kingdoms have become smaller. New nation states have emerged. It is a universal fact that global political and economic situations have changed. Yet, it is also a fact that territorial integrity of all sovereign nation states remained unchanged. One glaring example in contemporary world is the European Union (EU); a politico-economic union of 28 nation states in Europe. They founded the EU in the principle of interdependence, setting aside the territorial sovereignty of the member nation states intact and safe. The EU experiment suffered jolt when the United Kingdom, by a referendum, decided to quit EU. The reason was to restore/regain primacy on her sovereignty. Brexit was the living proof that such ideal may not survive the test of time in the end because there cannot be clean and clear separation between politico-economic interdependence sovereignties and holistic sovereignty of a nation. Holistic sovereignty includes territories, people and supreme powers integrated into one wholesome unit. The early exit of United Kingdom from EU stands testimony on such lofty ideal. It is a good lesson that is never too late for Nagas to learn.
Westphalian ideal of sovereignty undoubtedly inspired Naga nationalism but it is unwise to conclude that Naga nationalism originated from it and was entirely under its influence. It was an established fact that, before the British invasion, Naga sovereignty existed as democratic republics in pure form at village levels. When it was time for British to leave Indian sub-continent, Nagas expressed their desire as early as in 1929, to return to that village sovereignty. When the intention of British’s betrayal became clear, Nagas declared the sovereignty of Nagaland on August 14, 1947, one day ahead of India’s independence declaration. Driven by desire and choice, each village republic pledged to one sovereign nation state in the spirit and principle of federalism. Thus, village sovereignty evolved into sovereign nation state called ‘Nagaland’. What was the problem with India, if the Naga village republics on having recognized their common lineage, decided to co-exist as one corporate nation state? The definition of Westphalian sovereignty stands witness that all sovereign nation states exist in the principle of this ideal. The ideal of sovereign Nagaland, though unique in its own way, was not an exception.
Territorial definition is the mainstay of sovereignty. Sovereignty lies with the people is an abstract, people-centric theory of sovereignty without territorial definition. The definition of shared sovereignty is self-explanatory. In simple interpretation, it means two people-entities of one structural (read territorial) unit (read sovereignty) sharing its powers and functions through constitutional arrangement. In the context of Nagas, ‘Shared sovereignty’ and ‘Sovereignty lies with the people’ seemed to derive from contemporary political theories aimed at finding people-centric solution to India-created problems. India violated the sovereignty of Nagaland by her aggression. That was the core problem. While, such theories postulated for transitional solution may not be altogether unacceptable or may even be inevitable for some time, history is clear that the only finality will be sovereignty. The ideal for sovereign Nagaland originated from time-tested traditional practices in village republic and not from any conceived theory. The sovereignty of Nagaland is indivisible because the sovereignty of Nagaland as declared and mandated was for a holistic sovereignty. Therefore, people-centric solution minus territorial sovereignty will have no finality. Truth was the foundation. Deviation from truth will not yield finality. Despite repeated attempts to erase Naga nationalism, it has persisted because truth was amiss. It will live until truth is the finality. The finality in question is the permanent peaceful relationship between India and Nagaland, each respecting the other’s sovereignty.
People, who had crossed over to comfort zone by own volition need to learn to respect the ideals of past leaders and appreciate their sacrifices. They are morally responsible towards the gone-by leaders, their living progenies and those persevering true nationalists alive. Sooner than later, Nagas need to realize that the contemporary ‘realism theory’ is a deceptive theory that will lead us to self-destruction to the point of no return and painful regret. Sovereignty of Nagaland is not something that Nagas can achieve by the twist of fate like statehood, orchestrated by a section of non-actors. It was a pre-destined goal mandated by all that demands equal bearing by all.
