Situation compelled us to form new party: NSCN (Reformation)

EMN Dimapur, April 20 The NSCN (Reformation) has today attributed the split of NSCN-K to Khaplang’s autocratic style of running the GPRN and his unilateral decision in all administrative and political matters without consulting his Ato-kilonser or his council of kilonsers, and more importantly walking out of the reconciliation process. “In 2011 the NSCN (K) got splitted into two groups One led by (than C-in-C) Gen. Khole and Ato kilonser Ketovi Zhimomi and the other faction led by Chairman Khaplang. The reasons behind the split were many but the most important of all was the unilateral decision of Baba Khaplang in all administrative and political matters without consulting his Ato-kilonser or his council of kilonsers. He was literally running the GPRN autocratically, which did not go down well with the leaders of the Indian side. The next important thing was walking out of the reconciliation process.” MIP, Secretary NSCN (Reformation) in a statement said, “when all the Naga people were praying ceaselessly for peace, when there were tremendous efforts from people of all walks of life for peace and reconciliation, when there were programmes organized for the widowed and orphaned children, when there were football matches among the fiercest rivals, I am sure Naga people were not able to believe their own eyes. But, such was the wonder of FNR that, the national workers who were gunning after each other with AK-47 were now fighting for a small foot ball to the great applause and mesmerisation of the Naga family.” The statement said, Wangtin who repeatedly attended the reconciliation meeting on behalf of the NSCN (K) along with Kilonser P.Tikhak fervently appealed to Khaplang to rethink on his decision to withdraw from the reconciliation process but, he was adamant and went ahead with the declaration to withdraw through P.Tikhak, his then spokesperson. It maintained that both Wangtin and Tikhak continued their service with Khaplang not because they were anti-reconciliation but, because Khaplang was one of them and their conscience did not allow them to leave him alone and that both the leaders decided to work for the Naga cause along with Khaplang. “In 2012 both the leaders played a major role in getting a ceasefire with the Union of Myanmar, which was historic for the eastern Nagas because, it also brought lot of peace and appeasement for the eastern Nagaland along with the ceasefire. The eastern Nagas were for the first time experiencing a changed scenario, who were otherwise always at threat of being raided at anytime or forced to work at the tip of the barrel for the Myanmar Army. Now people started to plan for their future who were otherwise spending every single day with a fear that, if they will survive to see the next day.” The statement said, “Unlike the GoI, the Union of Myanmar has also given a free hand in all administration and commercial activities to the NSCN in the Naga areas to run their day to day affairs. But, ultimately when the peace was achieve on the Myanmar side Baba Khaplang decided to abrogate the ceasefire on the Indian side. It doesn’t mean that we are against the abrogation of ceasefire but, our argument is that, will it serve any purpose when the other Naga NPG’s are in ceasefire?. Now, the water was flowing above our heads, because the people especially the Tangsang-Konyak, inhabiting along the international border would be worst affected and it will gradually engulf all the other Nagas as well. He did not bother to inform his kilonsers and workers from Nagaland. He also did not inform the commanders and cadres in Ponghong designated camp, who were taken by surprise by AR troops. He also did not bother to inform his supervisor, CFSB, who was detained in Assam for more than six and half hours. Yet the two leaders, decided to defend Baba Khaplang in the CFSB meeting, the next day citing that, Baba Khaplang can never resort to anti-people activities like planting bombs in public places but, the next day he officially abrogated the ceasefire and the second day he expelled his two kilonsers for attending the CFSB meeting, when he himself is the appointee.” Reacting to K.V. Pusa’s recent statement, NSCN (Reformation) said, Pusa should have asked Khaplang the logic behind abrogating the ceasefire when he was under similar arrangement with the Union of Myanmar. “He should ask for a logic for expelling his supervisor CFSB and co-member, whom he himself has appointed to attend the CFSB meeting. He should ask for logic from Khaplang for walking out of the reconciliation process, when fervent prayers were conducted all over Nagaland for peace and unity among the Naga family. He should ask for logic for unilaterally abrogating the ceasefire with the GoI without taking into confidence his council of kilonsers. He should also ask for logic for not informing his own cadres in designated camps apart from Shuruhoto, before attacking the security forces. He must also ask for logic in giving a signature for “Deed of Commitment, for Peace and National Reconciliation” on 12th of February 2015 to the Union of Myanmar.” Stating that, in spite of repeated appeals to the people on the formation of NSCN-Reformation and informing through the media that, it was never their choice but the situation compelled them to form a new party to accommodate followers, the NSCN (Reformation) said, Pusa giving a new twist and trying to portray as ‘if we were too interested’ in forming a new party, was disturbing and uncalled for. “All members of NSCN-REFORMATION are former NSCN (K) cadres and civil workers. After Baba Khaplang decided to unilaterally abrogate the ceasefire all the NSCN cadres of the Indian side decided to continue the ceasefire with the GOI under the leadership of Wangtin Naga and P.Tikhak but since Khaplang has already abrogated the ceasefire officially it was not possible to continue under the same banner. Therefore, we have to re-name it for the convenience of our cadres and easy identification. But, why should Mr. Pusa have any problem if the former NSCN (K) cadres, now members of NSCN-REFORMATION want to have a ceasefire to maintain peace as desired by the people. What logic is he looking for when the same group of national workers were in ceasefire before it was renamed? The only difference is earlier it was including Khaplang and now it is without Khaplang. Why is he talking about peace and progress on the one hand and indulging in mudslinging with the NSCN workers on the other hand, who also wants to have ceasefire for peace? Yes, if I he has any other agenda, and wanted to invite a volatile situation in the Naga country so that, he can slam the state and the central government on law and order to get a political mileage than, he has the right to criticize and ridicule the NSCN-Reformation for expressing their desire for peace.” The statement said, the basic idea behind naming NSCN-Reformation was also its humble attempt to reform the Naga National movement by involving all the people, including the church, NGO’s, civil society, intellectuals and in sync with other Naga political groups. “ I think what K.V.Pusa has said on ‘anti-national’ and ‘waging war against India’ was incorrect at first place as we are still in war though the battle is yet to be won. So any activities of NSCN cannot be considered as anti-national. secondly, why should we go and wage war against India in New Delhi or elsewhere, we are only defending ourselves against their forceful occupation in Naga homeland. So, I think next time as a responsible person, if he is little careful and keep himself updated on the National activities this kind of unwanted situation can be avoided,” it added.