India News Online » News Analysis » Indian Politics » 

North East : Naga peace talks : Latest round ends on bitter note

	May 22, 2006

Govt. tells NSCN(IM) leadership to keep off India-baiters



Indian negotiators have cautioned the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Isak-Muivah) “not to jeopardise the peace process through its actions” of associating with anti-India organisations or foreign countries which have nothing to do with the Naga issue.



At their meeting with the general secretary of the NSCN (IM), Thuingaleng Muivah in Amsterdam on May 18-19, the Indian negotiators led by Union Minister of State Oscar Fernandes specially objected to the organisation sending an “emissary” to China recently.



Fernandes and former Home Secretary K. Padmanabhaiah, the two principal Indian negotiators, also objected to the NSCN (IM) associating with the Parliamentarians for National Self-Determination (PNSD), an organisation floated by a known India-baiter and Labour peer Lord Nazir Ahmed in UK.



Originally from Mirpur in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), Ahmed also runs the Jammu and Kashmir Human Rights Commission in the UK. In the new forum, he is assisted by a Khalistani Ranjit Singh Srai as general secretary of the outfit. New Delhi believes that PNSD has been launched only to give adverse publicity to India and only militant groups from India were invited to the inauguration ignoring movements for self-determination elsewhere - e.g. in Balochistan and in Gilgit and Baltistan in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.



NSCN (IM)’s steering committee member Rh. Raising addressed the first meeting of PNSD on May 11. New Delhi has found his associating the Naga issue with Khalistan and Kashmir provocative. It has also taken serious note of Raising declaring in London that “we strongly feel the need for third party mediation” and urging the British as the former colonial power in India to show “moral responsibility to say something on the (Naga) issue so that justice is done.”



Muivah on his part defended both actions in his informal meetings with the negotiators as well as outside. He accused India of “talking only of negative things.”



On sending an emissary to China, Muivah said: “We can send our men anywhere in the world. The Indian attitude is always one of trying to contain the Nagas, We cannot be like a bird in a cage. We have the right to go anywhere and talk about our rights.”



He is believed to have told the Indian negotiators that he suspected attempts to contain his organisation - India, he claimed, was promoting the activities of the rival faction of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Khaplang) and the United National Liberation Front (UNLF) of Manipur was bringing in arms through Myanmar which could be used against the Nagas. “Can we afford to be sitting ducks?” Muivah apparently asked the Indian negotiators.



Muivah told the Indian negotiators that the UNLF was paying “Indian rupees one crore a month to the Myanmar junta” as protection money. “Do you think we cannot bring in arms if we want?” he apparently asked them. He claimed that the Nagas were not bringing any weapons into India because of the ceasefire agreement and assured Indian negotiators that no arms were being sourced from China or Pakistan.



But why associate with China or India-baiters in Britain when he was engaged in talks with Delhi? “We do not associate with anyone. But we have the right to attend international conferences which deal with the right to self-determination,” he replied.



Muivah defended Raising arguing for third party mediation in London even when some friendly facilitators are already helping the negotiating process.



“When there is no possibility of resolving the issue between two parties, thinking about a third party is logical. Why should India interpret it wrongly ?” he asked.



About arguing for a British role, Muivah said: “History is very clear — after the colonial power retreated, many problems remained unresolved. The solution to those problems must have something to do with the British.”



The Naga leader claimed that he had entered the ceasefire process “to solve the problem through peaceful means but it is being used to dissipate us”.



He told the Indian negotiators that if the talks failed, the people would blame Delhi for its lack of initiative to take the peace process forward. He was told that both sides would have to take the blame if that happened.



“We have decided to move forward. Earlier there was a feeling that there was no movement in the process. I have told them that now that the Assembly elections are over in India, we can have more frequent interactions,” Fernandes said.





Kukis demand justice



The Centre-Naga talks in Amsterdam have cast a shadow in Manipur with the Kuki community urging the Prime Minister to punish NSCN (I-M) cadres responsible for the deaths of hundreds of their tribesmen in the early Nineties.



A memorandum, signed by Kuki leaders S. Chongloi and Lunsei, was despatched to Manmohan Singh on May 19, demanding a solution to the “Kuki problem” before settling the Naga issue.



The decision to send the memorandum was taken at a meeting of the Kuki Nampi Consultative Convention held on May 18 in Imphal.



Chongloi and Lunsei are the chairman and secretary respectively of the convention. Highlighting the problems faced by the Kukis, the memorandum said 900 Kukis were killed and 360 Kuki villages razed during the five-year-long “aggression” by the NSCN (I-M) in the early Nineties.



The Centre should first resolve the Kuki problem before making any deal with the NSCN (I-M), the memorandum said.



It should deliver justice to the Kukis by punishing those responsible for the genocide, a Kuki leader who took part in the convention, said.



After Independence, the Kukis reposed faith in the democratic set-up of India hoping for fundamental rights, brotherhood and equality for all. However, the sudden aggression by the NSCN (I-M) in the early Nineties led to the Kukis losing their faith in the Indian democratic polity, the memorandum added.



It also criticised the Centre for calling the NSCN (I-M) aggression an “ethnic clash”. Unarmed Kukis were forced to face a well-armed NSCN (I-M). “The Kukis were struggling to protect themselves with whatever they could.” The memorandum also criticised the Centre for forgetting the deaths and sufferings of the Kukis.



The Centre did not make any attempt to enforce the rule of law or identify the guilty persons for punishment. The ongoing peace talks were one-sided, it said. “Kukis have good wishes for our Naga co-inhabitants in Manipur to live together in harmony and peace. The government of India must not continue to deny justice to the Kukis. There must be transparency, equality and justifiability in the Government of India’s dealings with all communities. We want our problem correctly examined and solved without delay so as to instill confidence in us that Kukis are not under alien rule,” the memorandum said.