Staff Reporter
DIMAPUR, JULY 23
The National Socialist Council of Nagalim (Isaac-Muivah) on Wednesday suggested that the chairman of the Cease Fire Monitoring Group (CFMG), Lt Gen (Rtd) NK Singh was being used as a “tool” by some “Indian officials” with vested interests from the Ministry of Home Affairs.
This alleged manipulation of the CFMG chairman by MHA officials, according to the NSCN-IM, has been manifested in the recent statements made by NK Singh, in which he had claimed that the ceasefire agreement is confined only to the state of Nagaland.
“What the NSCN has observed and understood is that some vested interest Indian officials from MHA, they are using the CFMG chairman as their tool. Maybe for their own personal interest.
“But one thing must be made clear, that Nagas are not under their mercy. We are not begging. We are (fighting) for the rights of the Nagas,” convener of Cease Fire Monitoring Cell, NSCN-IM, Kraibo Chawang told a news conference here today.
The NSCN-IM, till now, has been restraining from making any public statements for the sake of goodwill and proper understanding within the CFMG, Chawang said – while adding that the CFMG chairman’s recent statements to the press had prompted the outfit to discard that approach.
Chawang said that if the CFMG chairman was certain that his brief of duty was limited only to the state of Nagaland, then “it is his own problem.” It however does not mean that there is no ceasefire in other Naga areas, he maintained.
He produced documents, at the news conference, signed by representatives of NSCN-IM and government of India which contained the following provision: “The ceasefire agreement is between the government of India and the NSCN as two entities without territorial limits.” It was signed on June 14, 2001, by Th Muivah and K Padmanabhaiah, representing NSCN-IM and GOI, respectively.
On the claim made by the CFMG chairman that the GOI had nullified the same, Chawang maintained that any undertaking signed between two entities cannot, and should not, be nullified without the consent of both the parties involved.
He also cited the statement of former Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee – who according to Chawang – had on December 8, 2002 told the NSCN-IM collective leadership at Osaka in Japan that “where there is a fighting there will be ceasefire.”
Chawang said that the NSCN-IM was aware that Delhi “has certain difficulties of its own.” But the principles of bilateral agreement must be followed nevertheless, he maintained.
“And to tell you frankly and openly, the ceasefire is more operative and effective in Manipur. In the hill areas, it is more peaceful,” Chawang shared. He said that even during the 2004 incident in which 15 NSCN-IM cadres, including Chawang himself, were arrested by Manipur commandos, the then Union Home Minister, LK Advani had “seriously questioned the Manipur Chief Minister as to why Nagas cannot have ceasefire in their own land.”
Rather the Manipur government was directed to escort them, with full arms and ammunitions, till Mao Gate, he said. Had there been no ceasefire in Manipur, things would not have happened so, he reasoned.
Against such a backdrop, Chawang wondered, what kind of authority makes the CFMG chairman to say that there is no ceasefire in Manipur. “Other people are afraid of the Naga solution, integration. Because of that they are going against us,” he said.
Nevertheless, Chawang hoped that Delhi “must be very serious on this issue” and assured that the NSCN-IM was ready to work it out and come to an understanding.
