It is a matter of some relief that a kind of pact has been signed between Government of India and Naga faction of NSCN (I.M.). Though details will take time to be officially released, it is a good sign, if as reported by the government that – (I.M.) which is admittedly the largest Naga group has given up its demand for a Sovereign State outside India, as was originally the demand of Phizo.
It is also a good that T. Muivah has agreed not to insist on including the areas inhabited by Nagas in the other State of Manipur, Assam, Arunchal Pradesh in the State of Nagaland. This demand which required cutting off areas from those States was a non-starter. No government could afford to settle on terms which would provoke counter movements in other North – East States. Of course it will require the Central Government to honestly abide by the spirit of Article 371A of the Constitution.
Right since 1947 Naga question has been the unsolved knot leading to almost a war like situation between the Nagas and Indian government. Some respite came when Prime Minister Shri I. K. Gujral, made the following announcement on July 25, 1997: “In recent talks with the Isac Muivah group of the national Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN), it has been mutually agreed to ceasefire with effect from 1 August, 1997 and initiate discussions at political levels.”
Of course one of serious drawback was that cease fire did not extend to other North-Eastern States with good deal of Naga population even when subsequent governments were so advised by some of us. So situation continued to remain unsettled.
I have had a fair deal of inkling of the open hostility and anger of Nagas towards India. As President of Peoples Union for Civil Liberties I had occasion to meet personally some of the top leader of Naga movement including Muviah and Isak Chisi Swu.
It was in 2000 that I was invited by Asia forum for a conference and also watch the proceedings in a Court at Bangkok (Thailand) where Muivah was being prosecuted for traveling on a fake passport. The delicate situation was because NSCN believed that the information about the movements of Muivah had been given by Indian government – the later denied it.
I also attended the court proceeding and was able to have a small talk, with Muivah, courtesy the security guards. Some of us were later in the evening invited by Isac Swu and his team who were all underground to a dinner. We were taken in a car from our Hotel with dark curtains on both sides, obviously so that we could not see the route from the hotel.
We understood their delicate concern, because the place was in Bangkok itself.At the meeting we suggested to Isac Swu and his colleagues that in meanwhile talks need not be stalled and Mr. Muivah (who was in prison) could nominate a team to continue the dialogue in his absence. We even then felt that Muivah and others were genuine for a peaceful settlement, especially when Mr. Rh. Raising, member, NSCN Steering Committee, openly told us that “Nagas are totally committed to solve the problem through peaceful means. They want to solve any problem through mutual discussion, understanding, respect and consent”.
We told them plainly that no government in India can be a party to allow Nagaland to secede from India. Of course maximum of autonomy can be worked out mutually within the broad parameters of the Constitution. It is thereafter that talks between Nagas and Govt. of India's represented by its Home Secretary. Padmanabhaish started.
Even when both Muivah and Swu came to Delhi and a meeting was held by some of us along with Shri V. P. Singh at the later’s residence who had by then ceased to be the Prime Minister, they reiterated their desire for settlement with larger autonomy and in a dignified manner. It is a pity that notwithstand this atmosphere it has taken such a long time. One may now be hesitatingly optimistic especially when Muivah has openly welcomed it and describing it as “Better understanding has been arrived ……based on the unique history and position of Nagas”. It is also a sign of practical wisdom that Indian government has agreed to facilitate the visit of Muivah group to go to Myanmar to consult and to the bring on board Khaplang group.
But one has still to be cautious because of exclusivity shown by Prime Minister in keeping isolated the Congress Chief Ministers of Assam, Manipur and Arunchal Pradesh in not sharing details with them who have similar issue of Nagas. But then small partisanship of two big political parties is shown by the Congress Chief Minister of these three states who boycotted to attend even after being invited, probably in their efforts to show their unflinching loyalty to Sonia Gandhi who went public on this lapse a day earlier. It is however a relief that the Central Government has now told those states that the deal will not affect their territories and also assured them that the details will be discussed with them before a final deal is signed.
The initial fault probably must have arisen because of the uncalled for faith of Modi in the wisdom of bureaucracy even in such sensitive political matters and is apparent from the exclusion of even Raj Nath Home Minister in the initial talks (when all the previous negotiations were held by the Home Ministry).

It would seem that the Prime Minister realizing the gravity of the Naga problem, was keen to find an equitable settlement when he said in his speech “We will not only try to heal wounds and resolve problems, but also be your partner as you restore your pride and prestige and that the only path to peace and understanding can come about when we deal with each other in a spirit of equality and respect, trust and confidence; when we seek to understand concerns and try to address aspirations.”(emphasis supplied)
Would not the Prime Minister like to express the same sentiments and approach to the Minorities in our country, especially to Muslims, the largest minority of 14 crores. This course is not only “Raj Dharam” but practical realistic approach of any top leader.
Rajindar Sachar

Hastakshep