Eastern Mirror Desk
Dimapur, April 27 (EMN): The suggestion of ‘one Naga National Government’ contained in the Naga Concordant signed in August, 2011 came from the leaders of armed Naga groups – not from the Forum for Naga Reconciliation (FNR) – according to the convenor of FNR, Rev. Dr. Wati Aier.
He made this disclosure while responding to queries from the audience during the recent public interaction initiated by the FNR in Dimapur. It was suggested to the FNR members that ‘unity or reconciliation means the coming together’ of different groups/units.
In response Aier referred to the Naga Concordant. On August 26, 2011 the top leaders of NSCN/GPRN, GPRN/NSCN and NNC/FGN namely Isak Chishi Swu, Th Muivah, Gen. (Retd) Khole Konyak, Kitovi Zhimomi, Brig. (Retd) S Singnya and Zhopra Vero met at Niathu Resort, at the FNR’s initiative.
“In the process the leaders said we must have one government, so you have heard the word, Naga National Government. It was very popular in 2012, very popular terminology. So this idea was not from FNR but from Naga political groups, those who signed the Covenant of Reconciliation. In short we decided to form one Naga National Government,” he shared.
Conversely, Aier admitted, the question for many people today was: ‘what happened to it?’
“First of all it was not given a fair trial. It takes time for a statement to come to a reality, but in the process what happened (in the aftermath) was very quick,” he said. Even as the wish for ‘one Naga National Government’ became a declared statement, the government of India ‘expedited’ talks with one of the Naga groups, according to Aier.
“Our Naga issue was kept in the backburner but when the Nagas were about to come together, are you following what I am saying? They took one away and became more serious with the talks. This is the kind of issue that we are facing. I think my analysis would not be wrong at this point,” he told the audience.
As the wait stretched for years, the FNR started getting the blame; compelling it to issue a commentary on ‘Tapping the Naga Concordant’ in the local newspapers recently. “So what FNR is saying is: ‘look at the untapped resources that we have. Let us try to go back in the past and the amount of work that we have in the Naga Concordant’.
“Can we retroactively look at that today and make it alive? It’s a process,” he said. Inviting suggestions from the ‘public intellectuals’, Aier stated that the FNR was yet to receive ‘anything from anyone’ in response to its ‘Tapping the Naga Concordant’ commentary.
“Where are the intellectuals? Where are the academicians? We have not heard anything. Those are, in my opinion, in our opinion very important documents. It is time, as we travel in the process of coming of age, you have to address to the people, not only to the bosti-wallahs but to the people here and out there that Nagas are also confident.
“We are talking about walking the Naga Day confidence, competence and building a robust community. A kind of a community that will usher in a new era. This is the why the FNR is very particular that we empower the young people,” he said.
The language of ‘exclusivism’, he said, comes from minds that are seduced by the past. “We are looking the 21st century, the politics of 21st century is all about identity, about people living without borders, when younger people are moving with sense of belonging and a sense of great possibilities to see the future.
“Here we have a group of people talking about the past. The more we talk about the past we going to be slaves in the present. Let us get rid of that. It is not going to work...any divisive methods or intentions will be a failure.”
The Naga Reconciliation process was different from most ‘reconciliation processes’ because in the latter cases, the process of reconciliation happens in a post-settlement scenario, according to Dr. Akum Longchari, another member of the FNR.
“But in the Naga context we are talking of reconciliation, we are working for reconciliation, while we are still in the midst of conflict. That brings a different dynamics to the whole idea of reconciliation. So speaking the truth in a post-settlement environment is very different from speaking the truth when you are still in conflict. Because there is a lot of mistrust, there is a lot of suspicion and above all, people do not feel safe.
“So for instance even the FNR, in our small gatherings where we create these safe places, a lot of the people who are representing different organisations, different political groups acknowledge that they have done wrong, and have said sorry. But all those were in a very private small, confined area. How do we take that acknowledgement to the public? That is a challenge of process. That is one aspect of it,” he shared.
The other aspect, Longchari said, was the need for a decisive push from the public. “In the same way that the Naga people made a decisive push for ending the violence, we need a similar decisive push for forgiveness and healing to actually be achieved. In the midst of that we have one big challenge, because even though fighting has stopped there is something called psychological warfare—which is you spread rumours, rumour will lead to confusion, confusion leads to division.
“We are not able to address that issue, the question of rumours, confusion and division. And these rumour, confusion and division seem to be shaping public opinion at this point of time. So for us to effectively push the reconciliation process forward we need to also find the way the cycle of rumours, confusion and division.”
