Copyright infringement is not intended

Context: Naga groups seek early peace deal. Nagaland Government-led consultative committee meeting adopted resolution for an early political solution.

Recent developments:

• The Naga peace talks were also impacted by the incident on December 4, 2021 when six villagers returning from a coal mine were killed in an operation by para commandos of the Assam Rifles in Nagaland’s Mon district.
• The dialogue between the Union Government and the NSCN-IM collapsed in 2020 when the largest Naga group refused to hold any further talks with government appointed interlocutor.

History of Naga struggle:

About Naga Peace Talks:

• The talks seek to settle disputes that date back to colonial rule.
• The Nagas are an ethnic community that comprises several tribes who live in the state of Nagaland and its neighbourhood.
• Key demands of Naga groups: Creation of Greater Nagalim, an extension of Nagaland’s borders by including Naga-dominated areas in neighbouring Assam, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh and even of Myanmar uniting 1.2 million Nagas.
• Assertion of Naga nationalism, gave rise to decades of insurgency that claimed thousands of lives.

What is the Naga peace process?

• It refers to ongoing talks between the Indian government and Naga insurgent groups, in particular the NSCN(IM), since 1997 with the aim to sign a Naga Peace Accord.
• The Naga insurgency, rooted in Naga nationalism, is one of the oldest insurgencies in the country.

What has happened since?

• In August 2015, the group signed a framework agreement with the Indian government for the Naga Peace Accord.
• Both the government and Naga groups successfully concluded talks on the government’s deadline of October 31, 2019, no accord was signed.
• In January 2020, the government had IB special director Akshay Mishra step in and continue the engagement.

How did things go wrong?

• The NSCN(IM) and the Indian government differed in their understanding of the framework agreement.
• The NSCN(IM) insistent on a Naga constitution, and was pushing for a Greater Nagalim stretching beyond the boundaries of the present Nagaland state.
• Although IM had softened its stance on the demand for a separate flag and constitution, still a few bones of contention remained.
• In November 2017, Ravi signed an agreement with seven groups who had come together under the banner of the Naga National Political Groups (NNPGs), which did not include the NSCN (IM).
• The IM, accused Ravi of attempting to “segregate the Naga civil society”.
• Ravi, meanwhile, continued to engage with the other Naga groups, and declared that the Accord would be signed with or without the NSCN(IM).

What are the real issues?

• The Naga issue is very complex, and is led by a Tangkhul from Manipur, for whom it is difficult to abandon the demand for a Greater Nagalim.
• There is no way the government would accept a separate constitution for Nagaland.

What is the way forward?

• It is important to understand that there cannot be an accord without the NSCN(IM).
• There is need to delicately close the gap between the IM and NNPGs.
• Some demands that need ironing out include
  • one for a bicameral Assembly with at least 40 nominated members representing different tribes;
  • absorption of cadres as local armed forces or in the Indian paramilitary;
  • setting up of autonomous councils in Naga-dominated areas of neighbouring states; and
  • use of the Naga flag for at least customary events.

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/naga-groups-seek-early-peace-dealsought/article65207950.ece

Download PDF